Alterations in Olfactory Cortex Volume in Mild Cognitive Impairment and Mild Alzheimer’s Disease Dementia: A Study of Sex-Related Differences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Aging is one of the greatest risk factors for neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer's disease (AD). As the disease progresses, neural loss in brain regions, such as the olfactory cortex (OC), i.e., a set of areas including the mediotemporal and orbitofrontal regions, may lead to dysfunction in the sense of smell and affect other brain regions that relate to the olfactory cortex by either afferent or efferent projections. METHODS: The objective of this study was to assess sex-related differences in olfactory cortex volume using magnetic resonance imaging in individuals with mild cognitive impairment, probable dementia of the AD type and in healthy older adults, using the Mini-Mental Statement Examination score, years of education, and total intracranial volume as correction factors. RESULTS: Atrophy of the olfactory cortex was observed in patients of both sexes with probable AD dementia. However, at the MCI stage, significant volumetric loss in the OC was detected in females only but not in males. CONCLUSIONS: This finding indicates greater pathological effects in this region in females at an earlier disease stage than in males. This study suggests that OC volume loss occurs differently between the sexes in older adults, with volumetric loss being greater in females.
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".