Executive Function Deficits in Genetic Frontotemporal Dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Executive dysfunction is a core feature of frontotemporal dementia (FTD). While there has been extensive research into such impairments in sporadic FTD, there has been little research in the familial forms. Methods: mutation carriers, stratified into asymptomatic, prodromal, and fully symptomatic; and 247 mutation-negative controls. Attention and executive function were measured using the Weschler Memory Scale-Revised (WMS-R) Digit Span Backwards (DSB), Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised Digit Symbol task, Trail Making Test Parts A and B, and the Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System Color Word Interference Test. Linear regression models with bootstrapping were used to assess differences between groups. Correlation of task score with disease severity was also performed, as well as an analysis of the neuroanatomical correlates of each task. Results: < 0.001). Discussion: mutation carriers. This differential performance across the genetic groups will be important in neuropsychological task selection in upcoming clinical trials.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".