Gaps in clinical research in frontotemporal dementia: A call for diversity and disparities–focused research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Frontotemporal dementia (FTD) is one of the leading causes of dementia before age 65 and often manifests as abnormal behavior (in behavioral variant FTD) or language impairment (in primary progressive aphasia). FTD's exact clinical presentation varies by culture, language, education, social norms, and other socioeconomic factors; current research and clinical practice, however, is mainly based on studies conducted in North America and Western Europe. Changes in diagnostic criteria and procedures as well as new or adapted cognitive tests are likely needed to take into consideration global diversity. This perspective paper by two professional interest areas of the Alzheimer's Association International Society to Advance Alzheimer's Research and Treatment examines how increasing global diversity impacts the clinical presentation, screening, assessment, and diagnosis of FTD and its treatment and care. It subsequently provides recommendations to address immediate needs to advance global FTD research and clinical practice.
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 | 0.213 | 0.270 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.039 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.020 |
| Research integrity | 0.016 | 0.022 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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".