Subtypes of brain change in aging and their associations with cognition and Alzheimer’s disease biomarkers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Structural brain changes underlie cognitive changes and interindividual variability in cognition in older age. By using structural MRI data-driven clustering, we aimed to identify subgroups of cognitively unimpaired older adults based on brain change patterns and assess how changes in cortical thickness, surface area, and subcortical volume relate to cognitive change. We tested (1) which brain structural changes predict cognitive change (2) whether these are associated with core cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) Alzheimer’s disease biomarkers, and (3) the degree of overlap between clusters derived from different structural modalities in 1899 cognitively healthy older adults followed up to 16 years. We identified four groups for each brain feature, based on the degree of a main longitudinal component of decline. The minimal overlap between features suggested that each contributed uniquely and independently to structural brain changes in aging. Cognitive change and baseline cognition were associated with cortical area change, whereas higher baseline levels of phosphorylated tau and amyloid-β related to changes in subcortical volume. These results may contribute to a better understanding of different aging trajectories. • Clustering on MRI data used to identify ageotypes based on brain change patterns. • Cognitive change and cognitive baseline were best predicted by cortical area changes. • Trajectories of brain and cognitive change may not necessarily be temporally paired. • Minimal overlap found between clusters derived from different structural features. • Subcortical volumetric change was highly related to cognition and AD biomarkers.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".