MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402393865 · doi:10.1002/hbm.70016

Neuropsychiatric symptoms: Risk factor or disease marker? A study of structural imaging biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease and incident cognitive decline

2024· article· en· W4402393865 on OpenAlexaff
Dylan X. Guan, Tanaeem Rehman, Santhosh Nathan, Romella Durrani, Olivier Potvin, Simon Duchesne, G. Bruce Pike, Eric E. Smith, Zahinoor Ismail

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Brain Mapping · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalHotchkiss Brain InstituteUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsDiseaseRisk factorCognitionAlzheimer's diseaseMedicineCognitive declineNeuroimagingNeurosciencePsychologyDegenerative diseaseDementiaPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) are risk factors for Alzheimer's disease (AD) but can also manifest secondary to AD pathology. Mild behavioral impairment (MBI) refers to later-life emergent and persistent NPS that may mark early-stage AD. To distinguish MBI from NPS that are transient or which represent psychiatric conditions (non-MBI NPS), we investigated the effect of applying MBI criteria on NPS associations with AD structural imaging biomarkers and incident cognitive decline. Data for participants (n = 1273) with normal cognition (NC) or mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center Uniform Data Set were analyzed. NPS status (MBI, non-MBI NPS) was derived from the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire and psychiatric history. Normalized measures of bilateral hippocampal (HPC) and entorhinal cortex (EC) volume, and AD meta-region of interest (ROI) mean cortical thickness were acquired from T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging scans. Multivariable linear and Cox regressions examined NPS associations with imaging biomarkers and incident cognitive decline, respectively. MBI was associated with lower volume and cortical thickness in all ROIs in both NC and MCI, except for EC volume in NC. Non-MBI NPS were only associated with lower HPC volume in NC. Although both of the NPS groups showed higher hazards for MCI/dementia than No NPS, MBI participants showed more rapid decline. Although both types of NPS were linked to HPC atrophy, only NPS that emerged and persisted in later-life, consistent with MBI criteria, were related to AD neurodegenerative patterns beyond the HPC. Moreover, MBI predicted faster progression to dementia than non-MBI NPS.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.818

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.316 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations29
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Brain MappingSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207