Fractional Anisotropy is a More Sensitive Diagnostic Biomarker Than Mean Kurtosis for Patients with Parkinson Disease with Cognitive Dysfunction: A Diffusional Kurtosis Map Tract-Based Spatial Statistics Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There is heterogeneity of white matter damage in Parkinson's disease patients with different cognitive states. Our aim was to find sensitive diffusional kurtosis imaging biomarkers to differentiate the white matter damage pattern of mild cognitive impairment and dementia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Nineteen patients with Parkinson disease with mild cognitive impairment and 18 patients with Parkinson disease with dementia were prospectively enrolled. All participants underwent MR examination with 3D-T1-weighted image and diffusional kurtosis imaging sequences. Demographic data were compared between the 2 groups. Voxelwise statistical analyses of diffusional kurtosis imaging parameters were performed using tract-based spatial statistics. The receiver operator characteristic curve of significantly different metrics was graphed. The correlation of significantly different metrics with global cognitive status was analyzed. RESULTS: = .014) were positively correlated with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. CONCLUSIONS: The diffusional kurtosis imaging-derived fractional anisotropy and mean kurtosis can detect the different white matter damage patterns of Parkinson disease with mild cognitive impairment and Parkinson disease with dementia. Fractional anisotropy is more sensitive than mean kurtosis in the differential diagnosis; fractional anisotropy derived from diffusional kurtosis imaging could become a promising imaging marker for the differential diagnosis of Parkinson disease with mild cognitive impairment and Parkinson disease with 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".