Quantitative electroencephalography in cerebral amyloid angiopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We investigated whether quantitative electroencephalography (qEEG) correlates with cognition and cortical superficial siderosis (cSS) in cerebral amyloid angiopathy. METHODS: We included patients with sporadic (sCAA) and hereditary Dutch-type CAA (D-CAA). Spectral measures and the phase lag index (PLI) were analyzed on qEEG. Cognition was assessed with the MoCA and cSS presence was scored on 3T-MRI. Linear regression analyses were performed to investigate these qEEG measures and cognition. Independent samples T-tests were used to analyze the qEEG measure differences between participants with and without cSS. RESULTS: We included 92 participants (44 D-CAA; 48 sCAA). A lower average peak frequency (β[95 %CI] = 0.986[0.252-1.721]; P = 0.009) and a higher spectral ratio (β[95 %CI] = -0.918[-1.761--0.075]; P = 0.033) on qEEG correlated with a lower MoCA score, irrespective of a history of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH). The PLI showed no correlation to the MoCA. qEEG slowing was not different in those with or without cSS. CONCLUSIONS: Spectral qEEG (but not PLI) reflects cognitive performance in patients with CAA with and without a history of sICH. We found no association between qEEG slowing and cSS. SIGNIFICANCE: qEEG could be a valuable biomarker, especially in challenging cognitive testing situations in CAA, and a potential predictive tool in future studies.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".