The Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative‐4 (ADNI‐4) Engagement Core: A culturally informed, community‐engaged research (CI‐CER) model to advance brain health equity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative-4 (ADNI-4) Engagement Core was launched to advance Alzheimer's disease (AD) and AD-related dementia (ADRD) health equity research in underrepresented populations (URPs). We describe our evidence-based, scalable culturally informed, community-engaged research (CI-CER) model and demonstrate its preliminary success in increasing URP enrollment. METHODS: URPs include ethnoculturally minoritized, lower education (≤ 12 years), and rural populations. The CI-CER model includes: (1) culturally informed methodology (e.g., less restrictive inclusion/exclusion criteria, sociocultural measures, financial compensation, results disclosure, Spanish Language Capacity Workgroup) and (2) inclusive engagement methods (e.g., the Engagement Core team; Hub Sites; Community-Science Partnership Board). RESULTS: As of April 2024, 60% of ADNI-4 new in-clinic enrollees were from ethnoculturally or educationally URPs. This exceeds ADNI-4's ≥ 50% URP representation goal for new enrollees but may not represent final enrollment. DISCUSSION: Findings show a CI-CER model increases URP enrollment in AD/ADRD clinical research and has important implications for clinical trials to advance health equity. HIGHLIGHTS: The Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative-4 (ADNI-4) uses a culturally informed, community-engaged research (CI-CER) approach. The CI-CER approach is scalable and sustainable for broad, multisite implementation. ADNI-4 is currently exceeding its inclusion goals for underrepresented populations.
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 | 0.098 | 0.069 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.027 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".