Cognitive Trajectories in Preclinical and Prodromal Alzheimer’s Disease Related to Amyloid Status and Brain Atrophy: A Bayesian Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cognitive decline is a key outcome of clinical studies in Alzheimer's disease (AD). Objective: To determine effects of global amyloid load as well as hippocampus and basal forebrain volumes on longitudinal rates and practice effects from repeated testing of domain specific cognitive change in the AD spectrum, considering non-linear effects and heterogeneity across cohorts. Methods: We included 1,514 cases from three cohorts, ADNI, AIBL, and DELCODE, spanning the range from cognitively normal people to people with subjective cognitive decline and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). We used generalized Bayesian mixed effects analysis of linear and polynomial models of amyloid and volume effects in time. Robustness of effects across cohorts was determined using Bayesian random effects meta-analysis. Results: We found a consistent effect of amyloid and hippocampus volume, but not of basal forebrain volume, on rates of memory change across the three cohorts in the meta-analysis. Effects for amyloid and volumetric markers on executive function were more heterogeneous. We found practice effects in memory and executive performance in amyloid negative cognitively normal controls and MCI cases, but only to a smaller degree in amyloid positive controls and not at all in amyloid positive MCI cases. Conclusions: We found heterogeneity between cohorts, particularly in effects on executive functions. Initial increases in cognitive performance in amyloid negative, but not in amyloid positive MCI cases and controls may reflect practice effects from repeated testing that are lost with higher levels of cerebral amyloid.
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 | 0.074 | 0.101 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| 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".