Diagnostic accuracy of research criteria for prodromal frontotemporal dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Genetic Frontotemporal Initiative Staging Group has proposed clinical criteria for the diagnosis of prodromal frontotemporal dementia (FTD), termed mild cognitive and/or behavioral and/or motor impairment (MCBMI). The objective of the study was to validate the proposed research criteria for MCBMI-FTD in a cohort of genetically confirmed FTD cases against healthy controls. METHODS: A total of 398 participants were enrolled, 117 of whom were carriers of an FTD pathogenic variant with mild clinical symptoms, while 281 were non-carrier family members (healthy controls (HC)). A subgroup of patients underwent blood neurofilament light (NfL) levels and anterior cingulate atrophy assessment. RESULTS: The core clinical criteria correctly classified MCBMI vs HC with an AUC of 0.79 (p < 0.001), while the addition of either blood NfL or anterior cingulate atrophy significantly increased the AUC to 0.84 and 0.82, respectively (p < 0.001). The addition of both markers further increased the AUC to 0.90 (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The proposed MCBMI criteria showed very good classification accuracy for identifying the prodromal stage of FTD.
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 | 0.009 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; 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".