Mild behavioral impairment and its relation to amyloid load in isolated REM sleep behavior disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In isolated REM sleep behavior disorder (iRBD), the evidence of cognitive impairment and co-existing amyloid pathology suggests that mild behavioral impairment (MBI) may be associated with disease progression. In this study, we investigated MBI and its association with cognitive function, brain amyloid load and glucose metabolism in iRBD patients to evaluate the utility of MBI as a predictive marker of disease progression. METHODS: F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET. MBI was evaluated using the MBI-checklist (MBI-C). Comparisons between MBI-positive and MBI-negative groups and correlations with MBI-C total scores were examined on neuropsychological performances and PET regional standardized uptake value ratios (SUVRs). Additionally, associations between regional amyloid burden and glucose metabolism and mediating role of MBI status on these associations were evaluated in all iRBD patients. RESULTS: Of 36 iRBD patients, about one-third were classified as MBI-positive. Although we did not find the differences between the MBI groups and correlations with MBI-C total scores in neuropsychological performances and brain glucose metabolism, the MBI-positive group revealed higher FBB SUVRs in the anterior cingulate cortex, prefrontal cortex, caudate nucleus, and putamen than the MBI-negative group. The FBB SUVR of caudate nucleus was negatively correlated with glucose metabolism in the precuneus, which was not directly mediated by the MBI. CONCLUSION: Characteristic amyloid accumulation in prefrontal and subcortical structures in MBI-positive iRBD patients suggests that MBI may be associated with early amyloid pathology that can be an integral role in disease progression.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".