Integrating plasma, MRI, and cognitive biomarkers for personalized prediction of decline across cognitive domains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Plasma biomarkers are associated with cognitive performance and decline in Alzheimer’s disease, making them promising for early detection. This study investigates their predictive value, combined with non-invasive measures, for cognitive decline in non-demented individuals. Methods We developed a machine-learning approach incorporating plasma biomarkers (A β 42/40, p-tau181, NfL), MRI, demographics, APOE4, and cognitive assessments. Various models were designed to predict decline rates across cognitive domains and assess their relevance in predicting dementia progression. Results Cross-validated correlations between predicted and actual cognitive decline rates were 0.50 for memory, 0.49 for language, 0.42 for executive function, and 0.44 for visuospatial ability. MRI showed greater predictive importance than plasma biomarkers. Among plasma biomarkers, NfL and p-tau181 outperformed A β 42/40. Conclusion Plasma biomarkers, especially when combined with MRI, APOE4, and cognitive measures, have the potential to predict memory decline and assess conversion risk, even in cognitively unimpaired individuals.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".