Leveraging longitudinal diffusion MRI data to quantify differences in white matter microstructural decline in normal and abnormal aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: It is unclear how rates of white matter microstructural decline differ between normal aging and abnormal aging. METHODS: Diffusion MRI data from several well-established longitudinal cohorts of aging [Alzheimer's Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI), Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging (BLSA), Vanderbilt Memory & Aging Project (VMAP)] was free-water corrected and harmonized. This dataset included 1,723 participants (age at baseline: 72.8±8.87 years, 49.5% male) and 4,605 imaging sessions (follow-up time: 2.97±2.09 years, follow-up range: 1-13 years, mean number of visits: 4.42±1.98). Differences in white matter microstructural decline in normal and abnormal agers was assessed. RESULTS: While we found global decline in white matter in normal/abnormal aging, we found that several white matter tracts (e.g., cingulum bundle) were vulnerable to abnormal aging. CONCLUSIONS: There is a prevalent role of white matter microstructural decline in aging, and future large-scale studies in this area may further refine our understanding of the underlying neurodegenerative processes. HIGHLIGHTS: Longitudinal data was free-water corrected and harmonizedGlobal effects of white matter decline were seen in normal and abnormal agingThe free-water metric was most vulnerable to abnormal agingCingulum free-water was the most vulnerable to abnormal aging.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".