Predictors of Transition from Mild Cognitive Impairment to Normal Cognition and Dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) represents a heterogeneous state between normal aging and dementia, with varied transition pathways. While factors influencing MCI progression are known, their role in cognitive reversal is unclear. This study analyzed 756 Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) participants, classified as progressive MCI (pMCI, N = 272, mean age = 75.10 ± 7.34 years), reversible MCI (rMCI, N = 52, mean age = 69.94 ± 7.98 years) and stable MCI (sMCI, N = 432, mean age = 73.34 ± 7.44 years) based on 36-month follow-up. We compared demographic, lifestyle, clinical, cognitive, neuroimaging, and biomarker data across groups and developed a prediction model. Patients in the rMCI group were significantly younger and had a higher level of education compared with those in the pMCI group. Memory, general cognition, daily functional activities, and hippocampal volume effectively distinguished all three groups. In contrast, Aβ, tau, and other brain regions were able to distinguish only between progressive and non-progressive cases. Informant-reported Everyday Cognition (Ecog) scales outperformed self-reported Ecog scales in differentiating subtypes and predicting progression. Multinomial regression revealed that higher education, larger hippocampal volume, and lower daily functional impairment were associated with reversion, whereas APOE ε4, poorer memory, and greater brain atrophy predicted progression (model accuracy: 78%). The results confirm the significant utility of hippocampal volume, education level, and daily functional activities for assessing baseline disparities and predicting reversion. This study highlights the differential contributions of cognitive abilities and brain regions on MCI reversal, advancing understanding of MCI heterogeneity and providing evidence for precise diagnosis and treatment in early MCI.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".