The longitudinal effects of global and regional brain measurements on cognitive abilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Loss of brain tissues and cognitive abilities are natural processes of aging, but longitudinal studies are limited. We explored the longitudinal association between global and regional brain measures with cognitive abilities among individuals with normal cognitive status, mild cognitive impairment, and Alzheimer's Disease, including those with stable or progressive cognitive status, from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Follow-up was conducted approximately every six months for two to three years to classify participants by their cognitive status (n = 814). Mixed effects models were used to measure the longitudinal association between global and regional brain measures with cognitive abilities assessed by the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment cognition sub-scale after controlling for covariates. While whole brain volume (controlling for head size) affected the rate of cognition changes among those with mild cognitive impairment or Alzheimer's, other volumetric and thickness measures (hippocampus volume, ventricles volume, and entorhinal cortex thickness) had differential effects on cognition, but not on the speed of their changes. Results highlight the potential importance of different brain regions on cognition, but perhaps not on the rate of change and should be further investigated.
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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".