Correlation between changes in apathy and cognition in Alzheimer’s disease associated apathy: Analysis of the Apathy in Dementia Methylphenidate Trial 2 (ADMET 2)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous trials have shown improvements in both apathy and cognition with methylphenidate (MPH). OBJECTIVES: To assess whether changes in apathy correlated with changes in cognition in the Apathy in Dementia Methylphenidate Trial 2 (ADMET 2). PARTICIPANTS: Mild to moderate AD patients with clinically significant apathy randomized to MPH (20 mg/day) or placebo for 6 months. MEASUREMENTS: Apathy was measured with the Neuropsychiatric Inventory-apathy (NPI-A) domain. Cognition was measured using the Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE), Hopkins Verbal Learning (immediate [HVLT-I], delayed [HVLT-D] recall), Digit Span (Forward [DF], Backward [DB]), Trail Making (TMT-A, TMT-B), Action Verbal Fluency (AV), Category Fluency (CF), and the Short Boston Naming Test (BNT). DESIGN: Linear mixed models included cognitive change scores as dependent variables and time, treatment, change in NPI-A and the interaction between treatment and change in NPI-A as independent variables, which were additionally adjusted for baseline NPI-A and cognitive scores, age, sex, level of education and presence of diabetes. RESULTS: 199 participants (66 % male) were included (98-MPH, 101-placebo). Among all participants, worsening CF was associated with worsening apathy (-0.15 (0.05), p = .003). In addition, change in HVLT-I was associated with the interaction between changes in apathy and treatment (-0.31 (0.07), p = 0.0000158). CONCLUSION: Changes in apathy are mostly independent of cognitive changes and apathy response to MPH may be independent from cognition. These results are consistent with the view that apathy as a syndrome is related to but distinct from cognition.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".