Longitudinal association between ß-amyloid accumulation and cognitive decline in cognitively healthy older adults: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This systematic review examined the longitudinal association between amyloid-β (Aβ) accumulation and cognitive decline in cognitively healthy adults. It was conducted using the PubMed, Embase, PsycInfo, and Web of Science databases. The methodological quality of the selected articles was assessed. In fine, seventeen longitudinal clinical studies were included in this review. A minority (seven out of 17) of studies reported a statistically significant association or prediction of cognitive decline with Aβ change, measured by positron emission tomography (PET; n = 6) and lumbar puncture (n = 1), with a mean follow-up duration of 3.17 years for cognition and 2.99 years for Aβ. The studies reporting significant results with PET found differences in the frontal, posterior cingular, lateral parietal and global (whole brain) cortices as well as in the precuneus. Significant associations were found with episodic memory (n = 6) and global cognition (n = 1). Five of the seven studies using a composite cognitive score found significant results. A quality assessment revealed widespread methodological biases, such as failure to report or account for loss-to follow up and missing data, and failure to report p-values and effect sizes of non-significant results. Overall, the longitudinal association between Aβ accumulation and cognitive decline in preclinical Alzheimer’s disease remains unclear. The discrepancy in results between studies may be explained in part by the choice of neuroimaging technique used to measure Aβ change, the duration of longitudinal studies, the heterogeneity of the healthy preclinical population, and importantly, the use of a composite score to capture cognitive changes with increased sensitivity. More longitudinal studies with larger sample sizes are needed to elucidate this relationship.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".