Beta to theta power ratio in EEG periodic components as a potential biomarker in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's dementia (AD) is associated with electroencephalography (EEG) abnormalities including in the power ratio of beta to theta frequencies. EEG studies in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) have been less consistent in identifying such abnormalities. One potential reason is not excluding the EEG aperiodic components, which are less associated with cognition than the periodic components. Here, we investigate whether aperiodic and periodic EEG components are disrupted differently in AD or MCI vs. healthy control (HC) individuals and whether a periodic based beta/theta ratio differentiates better MCI from AD and HC groups than a ratio based on the full spectrum. METHODS: Data were collected from 44 HC (mean age (SD) = 69.1 (5.3)), 114 MCI (mean age (SD) = 72.2 (7.5)), and 41 AD (mean age (SD) = 75.7 (6.5)) participants. Aperiodic and periodic components and full spectrum EEG were compared among the three groups. Receiver operating characteristic curves obtained via logistic regression classifications were used to distinguish the groups. Last, we explored the relationships between cognitive performance and the beta/theta ratios based on the full or periodic spectrum. RESULTS: Aperiodic EEG components did not differ among the three groups. In contrast, AD participants showed an increase in full spectrum and periodic relative powers for delta, theta, and gamma and a decrease for beta when compared to HC or MCI participants. As predicted, MCI group differed from HC participants on the periodic based beta/theta ratio (Bonferroni corrected p-value = 0.036) measured over the occipital region. Classifiers based on beta/theta power ratio in EEG periodic components distinguished AD from HC and MCI participants, and outperformed classifiers based on beta/theta power ratio in full spectrum EEG. Beta/theta ratios were comparable in their association with cognition. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to a full spectrum EEG analysis, a periodic-based analysis shows that MCI individuals are different on beta/theta ratio when compared to healthy individuals. Focusing on periodic components in EEG studies with or without other biological markers of neurodegenerative diseases could result in more reliable findings to separate MCI from healthy aging, which would be valuable for designing preventative interventions.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".