Modeling Alzheimer’s disease: Bayesian copula graphical model from demographic, cognitive, and neuroimaging data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The early detection of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) requires an understanding of the relationships between a wide range of features. Conditional independencies and partial correlations are suitable measures for these relationships, because they can identify the effects of confounding and mediating variables. Objective To estimate conditional dependencies and partial correlations between relevant features in AD using a Bayesian approach to Gaussian copula graphical models (GCGMs). This approach has two key advantages. First, it includes binary, discrete, and continuous variables. Second, it quantifies the uncertainty of the estimates. Despite these advantages, Bayesian GCGMs have not been applied to AD research yet. Methods We design a GCGM to find the conditional dependencies and partial correlations among brain-region specific gray matter volume and glucose uptake, amyloid-beta levels, demographic information, and cognitive test scores. We applied our model to 1 022 participants, including healthy and cognitively impaired, across different stages of AD. Results We found that aging reduces cognition through three indirect pathways: hippocampal volume loss, posterior cingulate cortex (PCC) volume loss, and amyloid-beta accumulation. We found a positive partial correlation between being woman and cognition, but also discovered four indirect pathways that dampen this association in women: lower hippocampal volume, lower PCC volume, more amyloid-beta accumulation, and less education. We found limited relations between brain-region specific glucose uptake and cognition, but discovered that the hippocampus and PCC volumes are related to cognition. Conclusions This study shows that the use of GCGMs offers valuable insights into AD pathogenesis.
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 | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".