HEARING AND OLFACTORY LOSS ASSOCIATED WITH ALTERED BRAIN STRUCTURE AND CONNECTIVITY IN DEMENTIA RISK
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Sensory loss in hearing, vision, and olfaction is highly prevalent in older adults and each is associated with higher risk of developing dementia. We sought to identify whether these sensory factors are associated with alterations in brain function and structure in older adults with or at risk for dementia. Our groups included those with low risk (normal cognition, no cognitive complaints (NC=128; mean age=69 years; mean education=16 years)), and those with higher risk, namely 135 individuals with subjective reports of cognitive decline (SCD) but normal cognition (age=70; education=17), and 241 participants with mild cognitive impairment (MCI; age=72; education=16), and 93 with Alzheimer’s disease (AD, age=75; education=15). We used data from the COMPASS-ND study (Release 7). Hearing loss was assessed with pure-tone screening, vision with contrast sensitivity, and olfaction with the Brief Smell Identification Test. Normal sensory performance was observed in a minority of participants and decreased across the dementia risk spectrum groups (e.g., NC: 29%; SCD: 29%; MCI: 11%; AD: 2%). Olfactory deficits were the most frequent, followed by hearing impairment, and then deficits in visual contrast sensitivity. Deficits in multiple sensory domains were highly prevalent, with 37% of participants with AD having deficits in two or more domains. Preliminary analyses indicate that hearing loss is associated with altered connectivity in the default mode network and olfactory loss is associated with reduced hippocampal volumes in SCD. Thus, sensory loss is highly prevalent and co-morbid in persons with or at risk for dementia and has implications for cognition and brain function.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".