MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396587126 · doi:10.1186/s13195-024-01438-3

Irregular word reading as a marker of semantic decline in Alzheimer’s disease: implications for premorbid intellectual ability measurement

2024· article· en· W4396587126 on OpenAlexafffund
Anna Marier, Mahsa Dadar, Florence Bouhali, Maxime Montembeault

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s Research & Therapy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University InstituteUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthGenentechIXICOH. Lundbeck A/SServierEisaiNorthern California Institute for Research and EducationBioClinicaAix-Marseille UniversitéF. Hoffmann-La RocheAgence Nationale de la RechercheUniversity of Southern CaliforniaBiogenEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers SquibbU.S. Department of DefenseMeso Scale DiagnosticsAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeNovartis Pharmaceuticals CorporationPfizerNational Institute on AgingAlzheimer's Association
KeywordsReading (process)DementiaPsychologySemantic dementiaCognitionSemantic memoryDiseaseCognitive declineWord (group theory)Alzheimer's diseaseNeurologyCognitive psychologyCognitive reserveMedicineLinguisticsPsychiatryPathologyFrontotemporal dementia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Irregular word reading has been used to estimate premorbid intelligence in Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia. However, reading models highlight the core influence of semantic abilities on irregular word reading, which shows early decline in AD. The primary objective of this study is to ascertain whether irregular word reading serves as an indicator of cognitive and semantic decline in AD, potentially discouraging its use as a marker for premorbid intellectual abilities. METHOD: Six hundred eighty-one healthy controls (HC), 104 subjective cognitive decline, 290 early and 589 late mild cognitive impairment (EMCI, LMCI) and 348 AD participants from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative were included. Irregular word reading was assessed with the American National Adult Reading Test (AmNART). Multiple linear regressions were conducted predicting AmNART score using diagnostic category, general cognitive impairment and semantic tests. A generalized logistic mixed-effects model predicted correct reading using extracted psycholinguistic characteristics of each AmNART words. Deformation-based morphometry was used to assess the relationship between AmNART scores and voxel-wise brain volumes, as well as with the volume of a region of interest placed in the left anterior temporal lobe (ATL), a region implicated in semantic memory. RESULTS: EMCI, LMCI and AD patients made significantly more errors in reading irregular words compared to HC, and AD patients made more errors than all other groups. Across the AD continuum, as well as within each diagnostic group, irregular word reading was significantly correlated to measures of general cognitive impairment / dementia severity. Neuropsychological tests of lexicosemantics were moderately correlated to irregular word reading whilst executive functioning and episodic memory were respectively weakly and not correlated. Age of acquisition, a primarily semantic variable, had a strong effect on irregular word reading accuracy whilst none of the phonological variables significantly contributed. Neuroimaging analyses pointed to bilateral hippocampal and left ATL volume loss as the main contributors to decreased irregular word reading performances. CONCLUSIONS: While the AmNART may be appropriate to measure premorbid intellectual abilities in cognitively unimpaired individuals, our results suggest that it captures current semantic decline in MCI and AD patients and may therefore underestimate premorbid intelligence. On the other hand, irregular word reading tests might be clinically useful to detect semantic impairments in individuals on the AD continuum.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.770
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.192
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s Research & TherapySame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207