MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390201343 · doi:10.1002/alz.076560

Evolution of language abilities over the course of the disease in a large cohort of patients with lvPPA: More than a repetition impairment

2023· article· en· W4390201343 on OpenAlexaff
Monica Lavoie, Maud Tastevin, Justine De La Sablonnière, Élizabeth Poulin, Julie Carrier‐Auclair, Robert Laforce

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpecific language impairmentRepetition (rhetorical device)CohortLanguage impairmentGrammarPsychologyApraxiaAudiologyComprehensionMedicinePediatricsDevelopmental psychologyAphasiaLinguisticsCognitive psychologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Initial language impairment in lvPPA causes naming and repetition difficulties along with phonological errors (Gorno‐Tempini et al., 2011). Little is known about the evolution of other language capacities with disease progression. This study aimed at exploring the full range of language impairments throughout the course of the disease, from onset to death. Method We performed a retrospective chart review on a large cohort of deceased lvPPA patients ( n = 38; 18 M, 19 F; Mean age at onset = 69 years old). Presence or absence of impairment in various language abilities was determined via consensus by three experienced raters at 5 time points from onset to death. Result All 38 patients developed anomia, repetition impairment and writing difficulties throughout disease course (Figure 1). The overall prevalence of reading difficulties was also high (Figure 1), with impairment appearing more than two years post‐onset in most cases (Figure 2). Comprehension deficits were highly prevalent, appearing mostly in the first two years post onset (Figure 2). More than 75% of patients showed grammar difficulties (Figure 1), mainly in later stages of the disease (Figure 2). Semantic deficits also appeared later (Figure 2). Finally, apraxia of speech was quite infrequent (Figure 1). Conclusion In addition to known language deficits in lvPPA (i.e., naming, repetition, reading and writing, see Brambati et al., 2009; Faria et al., 2013; Gorno‐Tempini et al., 2011; Sepelyak et al., 2011), our results suggest early impairments in comprehension as well as late grammar difficulties. To our knowledge, this is the first study which addresses the full range of language impairments in lvPPA over the entire course of the disease. We believe this is highly relevant for patients/families to better prepare for the future, as well as therapists to design more focused 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 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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances→French-language works237,207→