MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390198516 · doi:10.1002/alz.082064

Longitudinal changes in driving behaviours among older adults with different A/T/N biomarker profiles

2023· article· en· W4390198516 on OpenAlexaff
Kelly Long, Sayeh Bayat, Ganesh M. Babulal

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOlder Adults Driving Studies
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteOntario Brain InstituteUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomarkerMedicineCohortDementiaNeurodegenerationLongitudinal studyClinical Dementia RatingInternal medicineDiseasePsychologyOncologyPathologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The pathophysiological process of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) spans approximately 10‐15 years. To define AD by its pathologic processes, the A/T/N classification framework was proposed constituting ß‐amyloid (A), tau (T), and neurodegeneration (N) biomarkers derived from cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) or imaging. With these biomarkers, individuals can be divided into four categories: normal (A‐T‐N‐), AD pathologic change (A+T‐N‐), AD (A+T+N‐, A+T‐N+, A+T+N+), and suspected non‐AD pathology (SNAP) (A‐T+N‐, A‐T‐N+, A‐T+N+). Recent evidence indicates that daily driving behaviours can identify preclinical AD, solely based on CSF ß‐amyloid (A), with high accuracy. This study aims to determine the extent to which longitudinal changes in driving behaviour vary between individuals with different A/T/N profile categories. Method Participants were enrolled in a longitudinal study on driving and preclinical AD biomarkers from Washington University School of Medicine. Temporospatial driving behaviours were collected with a data logger installed in participant vehicles over a period between January 2015 and March 2020. CSF collected within three years of each driving event was used to assign A/T/N categories. The cohort included 132 cognitively normal (Clinical Dementia Rating of 0) older adults (>65). Changes in driving behaviours over time were modelled for each group using linear mixed‐effects models. A Z‐test was used to determine if the slopes significantly differed between individuals with normal biomarkers and the remaining groups. Result Participants were classified as 59 individuals with normal biomarkers, 9 with AD pathologic change biomarkers, 45 with AD biomarkers, and 19 with SNAP biomarkers. Compared to normal aging, the AD pathology group had a statistically significantly higher increase in average occurrences of under‐speeding (p = 0.001), a significant decrease in average trip duration (p = 0.021), and a significant decrease in the average standard deviation of vehicle speed (p = 0.029). The AD group had no significant differences from the normally aging group. The SNAP group showed a significantly higher increase in the average occurrences of over‐speeding (p<0.001) than normal aging. Conclusion Driving behaviours and their rate of change over time vary between individuals with different A/T/N profile categories. These differences provide an opportunity to strengthen our understanding of the disease trajectory.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & DementiaSame topicOlder Adults Driving StudiesFrench-language works237,207