Multi-night acoustic stimulation is associated with better sleep, amyloid dynamics, and memory in older adults with cognitive impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Sleep is a potential early, modifiable risk factor for cognitive decline and dementia. Impaired slow wave sleep (SWS) is pronounced in individuals with cognitive impairment (CI). Cognitive decline and impairments of SWS are bi-directionally linked in a vicious cycle. SWS can be enhanced non-invasively using phase-locked acoustic stimulation (PLAS), potentially breaking this vicious cycle. Eighteen healthy older adults (HC, agemean±sd, 68.3 ± 5.1) and 16 older adults (agemean±sd, 71.9 ± 3.9) with CI (Montreal Cognitive Assessment ≤ 25) underwent one baseline (sham-PLAS) night and three consecutive stimulation nights (real-PLAS). EEG responses and blood-plasma amyloid beta Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio were measured pre- and post-intervention, as was episodic memory. The latter was again evaluated 1 week and 3 months after the intervention. In both groups, PLAS induced a significant electrophysiological response in both voltage- and time–frequency analyses, and memory performance improved in association with the magnitude of this response. In the CI group, both electrophysiological and associated memory effects were delayed compared to the healthy group. After 3 intervention nights, electrophysiological response to PLAS was no longer different between CI and HC groups. Only in the CI sample, stronger electrophysiological responses were significantly associated with improving post-intervention Aβ42/Aβ40 ratios. PLAS seems to improve SWS electrophysiology, memory, and amyloid dynamics in older adults with CI. However, effects on memory require more time to unfold compared to healthy older adults. This indicates that PLAS may become a potential tool to ameliorate cognitive decline, but longer interventions are necessary to compensate for declining brain integrity. This study was pre-registered (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04277104).
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".