Vulnerability to memory decline in aging revealed by a mega-analysis of structural brain change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brain atrophy is a key factor behind episodic memory loss in aging, but the nature and ubiquity of this relationship remains poorly understood. This study leverages 13 longitudinal datasets, including 3737 cognitively healthy adults (10,343 MRI scans; 13,460 memory assessments), to determine whether brain change-memory change associations are more pronounced with age and genetic risk for Alzheimer's Disease. Both factors are associated with accelerated brain decline, yet it remains unclear whether memory loss is exacerbated beyond what atrophy alone would predict. Additionally, we assess whether memory decline aligns with a global pattern of atrophy or stems from distinct regional contributions. Our mega-analysis reveals a nonlinear relationship between memory decline and brain atrophy, primarily affecting individuals with above-average brain structural decline. The associations are stronger in the hippocampus but also spread across diverse cortical and subcortical regions. The associations strengthen with age, reaching moderate associations in participants in their eighties. While APOE ε4 carriers exhibit steeper brain and memory loss, genetic risk has no effect on the change-change associations. These findings support the presence of common biological macrostructural substrates underlying memory function in older age which are vulnerable to multiple age-related factors, even in the absence of overt pathological changes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".