Identifying the Neuropsychological Profile of Cerebral Amyloid Angiopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) occurs when the protein, beta-amyloid, deposits onto blood vessels in the brain, often resulting in cognitive impairment. This study aims to identify the neuropsychological profile of CAA by comparing CAA participants to the normal population and cognitively-similar patient populations, distinguishing between CAA syndromes, and determining whether white matter hyperintensity volume or APOE ε4 mediate cognitive impairment. Thirty-four CAA, 16 Alzheimer’s disease, 69 mild cognitive impairment, and 27 minor ischemic stroke participants underwent neuropsychological testing. Cross-sectional data revealed lower performance on tests of perceptual speed, episodic memory, and executive functioning in CAA participants when compared to the normal population (t(33) = -3.76, p = <0.001; t(32) = -2.45, p = 0.02; t(33) = -6.21, p = <0.001; respectively). Overall, CAA was most cognitively similar to vascular cognitive impairment. Larger sample sizes and longitudinal analyses in future will help to advance understanding of cognitive deficits associated with CAA.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".