Dataset for research: "MTA and Koedam Score Contributes to Cognitive Impairment in Probable Alzheimer, Vascular and Mixed Dementia: A Memory Clinic Study in Indonesia"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is a dataset for research : "MTA and Koedam Score Contributes to Cognitive Impairment in Probable Alzheimer, Vascular and Mixed Dementia: A Memory Clinic Study in Indonesia" Abstract Background. Medial Temporal Atrophy (MTA) and Parietal Atrophy (Koedam score) have been used in clinical practice to help the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. However, the role of this brain imaging marker in early detection of other type of dementia remains elusive. The study aims to investigate the association between MTA and Koedam scores with the cognitive function in dementia patients (Alzheimer, vascular and mixed dementia). Method This was a cross-sectional study using data from a Memory Clinic in Dr. Sardjito General Hospital Yogyakarta, Indonesia. The data was collected from January 2020 until December 2022. We collected the data regarding demographic and clinical characteristics, including head MRI data and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score. The cut-off points of MTA score and Koedam score were determined by using Receiver Operating Curve (ROC) and Youden Index. Multivariate analysis was performed to investigate variables which were associated with the cognitive function. Result From 61 dementia patients, 22.95% was probable Alzheimer’s disease, 59.01% was vascular dementia, and 18.03% was mixed dementia. Correlation test showed that MTA and Koedam score were negatively associated with Montreal Cognitive Assessment-Indonesian Version (MoCA-INA) score. A bivariate analysis supports the findings that patients with combination of MTA score ≥3 and Koedam score ≥2 was more likely to have poor cognitive function (OR= 11.33; p<0.05). Multivariate analysis showed higher MTA (≥3) and Koedam (≥2) scores were associated with poor cognitive function in dementia patients (OR= 13.54, 95% CI= 1.77-103.43, p=0.01 and OR= 5.52, 95% CI= 1.08-28.19, p=0.04) Conclusion Higher MTA and Koedam score contribute to worse cognitive function in any type of dementia patients. Keywords. Imaging Marker, Medial Temporal Atrophy (MTA), Koedam Score, Cognitive Function, Dementia
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 | 0.004 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.065 | 0.017 |
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".