MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406030245 · doi:10.1002/alz.092258

A Data‐Driven Examination of Apathy and Depression in Cognitively Normal Older Adults

2024· article· en· W4406030245 on OpenAlexaff
Miguel Vasconcelos Da Silva, Dag Aarsland, Clive Ballard, Anne Corbett, Zahinoor Ismail, Byron Creese

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsApathyDementiaMoodDepression (economics)PsychologyMood disordersProxy (statistics)Clinical psychologyPsychiatryClinical Dementia RatingLatent class modelDiseaseMedicineAnxietyCognitionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Apathy and mood symptoms are increasingly recognised as clinical important aspects of prodromal dementia; both are associated with increased risk of dementia even in cognitively normal people. The clinical overlap between apathy and low mood poses a challenge in distinguishing between the two conditions. It is crucial to differentiate between depression and apathy, along with any underlying syndromes, to facilitate the development of targeted treatments. Using a data-driven approach, we recently reported the existence of distinct apathy and depression clusters in dementia, confirming observations from the clinic and epidemiology. In this study we sought to establish whether similar patterns of symptoms were present in cognitively normal older adults METHOD: We analysed data from 21,925 community dwelling older adults. Latent class analysis (LCA) was applied to self-reported and proxy ratings (obtained using the Mild Behavioral Impairment Checklist) of apathy and mood. Polygenic Risk Scores for Alzheimer's disease (AD) and Major Depression (MDD) were tested for associated with class membership. RESULT: The LCA analysis using proxy data showed a 4-class group which was considered the best model: No symptoms, Depression, Apathy/depression, and an Apathy group. The LCA using self-reported data reveals the 4-class group without a as a clear apathy class as the proxy data (see Figures 1 and 2). PRS for AD and MDD were only associated with depression and apathy/depression classes in self-reported data (not in proxy data). CONCLUSION: This analysis highlights the apathy phenotype as a unique and separate condition, underscoring the imperative for additional research in this area. This emphasizes the potential for innovative approaches to delve deeper into the exploration and comprehension of apathy. The differences between the self and proxy reported data highlights the possibility of under reporting of apathy by patients.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.290 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→