Association between clinical dementia rating and clinical outcomes in Alzheimer's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We examined associations between the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale (CDR) and function (Functional Assessment Scale [FAS]), neuropsychiatric symptoms (Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire [NPI-Q]), and cognitive impairment in Alzheimer's disease (AD). METHODS: We used data from the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center Uniform Data Set and defined cognitively unimpaired and AD stages using CDR-global. RESULTS: Functional and neuropsychiatric symptoms occur as early as the mild cognitive impairment (MCI) phase. The adjusted lest square mean FAS (95% confidence interval [CI]) was lowest in cognitively unimpaired (3.88 [3.66, 4.11] to 5.01 [4.76, 5.26]) and higher with more advanced AD (MCI: 8.17 [6.92, 9.43] to 20.87 [19.53, 22.20]; mild: 18.54 [17.57, 19.50] to 28.13 [27.14, 29.12]; moderate: 26.01 [25.31, 26.70] to 29.42 [28.73, 30.10]). FAS and NPI-Q scores increased steeply with MCI (NPI-Q: 5.55 [4.89, 6.20] to 7.11 [6.43, 7.78]) and mild AD dementia (NPI-Q: 6.66 [5.72, 7.60] to 8.32 [7.32, 9.33]). DISCUSSION: CDR-global staged AD by capturing differences in relevant outcomes along AD progression. Highlights: There were strong associations among CDR and the various outcomes relevant to healthcare providers, patients, and their care givers, such as activities of daily living.Overall, activities of daily living, neuropsychiatric symptoms, and cognitive function outcomes deteriorated over time and can be observed in early stages of AD (MCI or mild dementia).Our findings directly inform the current understanding of AD progression and can aid in care planning and benefit assessments of early AD interventions to delay the progression of AD to more advanced stages.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".