MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414394996 · doi:10.1002/brb3.70919

Microstructural Hippocampal Alterations in Alzheimer's Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Diffusion Kurtosis Imaging

2025· review· en· W4414394996 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amir Mahmoud Ahmadzadeh, Sadegh Ghaderi, Sana Mohammadi, Nahid Jashirenezhad, Farzad Fatehi

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain and Behavior · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHippocampal formationKurtosisDiffusionHippocampusDiffusion MRI

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The hippocampus is highly vulnerable in Alzheimer's disease (AD), with early microstructural changes potentially detectable via diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI). Previous studies report promising DKI findings in AD, necessitating systematic evaluation. To compare hippocampal DKI metrics, particularly mean kurtosis (MK), between AD patients and healthy controls (HCs) and explore factors influencing these differences. METHODS: for heterogeneity, and Egger's/Begg's tests for publication bias (significance: p < 0.05). RESULTS: Ten studies (215 AD patients, 217 HCs; mean age: 65-75 years) using 3.0 T MRI were included. Eight articles were included in the meta-analysis to compare MK between groups. AD patients exhibited significantly reduced bilateral hippocampal MK compared to HCs (left: SMD = -1.32, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] [-1.97 to -0.66]; right: SMD = -1.22 [-1.88 to -0.56]; both p < 0.001), indicating compromised microstructural complexity. Subgroup analyses revealed more pronounced MK reductions in studies with higher male ratios (>42%; left: SMD = -1.87; right: SMD = -1.91; p < 0.05). Age, echo time, repetition time, and diffusion directions did not significantly influence effect sizes. Sensitivity analyses confirmed robustness, and publication bias was detected, but trim-and-fill analyses revealed no missing studies. CONCLUSION: Reduced hippocampal MK in AD reflects microstructural degeneration, with sex-related differences in effect magnitude.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.027
Bibliometrics0.0060.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.088
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.331 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain and BehaviorSame topicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207