Disinhibition in dementia related to reduced morphometric similarity of cognitive control network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Disinhibition is one of the most distressing and difficult to treat neuropsychiatric symptoms of dementia. It involves socially inappropriate behaviours, such as hypersexual comments, inappropriate approaching of strangers and excessive jocularity. Disinhibition occurs in multiple dementia syndromes, including behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia, and dementia of the Alzheimer's type. Morphometric similarity networks are a relatively new method for examining brain structure and can be used to calculate measures of network integrity on large scale brain networks and subnetworks such as the salience network and cognitive control network. In a cross-sectional study, we calculated morphometric similarity networks to determine whether disinhibition in behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia (n = 75) and dementia of the Alzheimer's type (n = 111) was associated with reduced integrity of these networks independent of diagnosis. We found that presence of disinhibition, measured by the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire, was associated with reduced global efficiency of the cognitive control network in both dementia of the Alzheimer's type and behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia. Future research should replicate this transdiagnostic finding in other dementia diagnoses and imaging modalities, and investigate the potential for intervention at the level of the cognitive control network to target disinhibition.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".