Language dysfunction correlates with cognitive impairments in older adults without dementia mediated by amyloid pathology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Previous studies have explored the application of non-invasive biomarkers of language dysfunction for the early detection of Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, language dysfunction over time may be quite heterogeneous within different diagnostic groups. Method: Patient demographics and clinical data were retrieved from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) database for the participants without dementia who had measures of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers and language dysfunction. We analyzed the effect of longitudinal neuropathological and clinical correlates in the pathological process of semantic fluency and confrontation naming. The mediation effects of AD biomarkers were also explored by the mediation analysis. Result: There were 272 subjects without dementia included in this analysis. Higher rates of decline in semantic fluency and confrontation naming were associated with a higher risk of progression to MCI or AD, and a greater decline in cognitive abilities. Moreover, the rate of change in semantic fluency was significantly associated with Aβ deposition, while confrontation naming was significantly associated with both amyloidosis and tau burden. Mediation analyses revealed that both confrontation naming and semantic fluency were partially mediated by the Aβ aggregation. Conclusion: In conclusion, the changes in language dysfunction may partly stem from the Aβ deposition, while confrontation naming can also partly originate from the increase in tau burden. Therefore, this study sheds light on how language dysfunction is partly constitutive of mild cognitive impairment and dementia and therefore is an important clinical predictor.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".