MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7116839358 · doi:10.1002/alz70862_110260

Tau exacerbates the development of motor disturbances but has no effect on the development of irritability across the Braak stages – The HEAD Study

2025· article· en· W7116839358 on OpenAlexaff
Cristiano Schaffer Aguzzoli, Guilherme Povala, Pamela C.L. Ferreira, Firoza Z Lussier, Guilherme Bauer‐Negrini, Lívia Amaral, Carolina Soares, Marina Scop Medeiros, João Pedro Ferrari‐Souza, Bruna Bellaver, Hussein Zalzale, Francieli Rohden, Douglas Teixeira Leffa, Lucas Porcello Schilling, Eduardo R. Zimmer, Dana Tudorascu, Belén Pascual, Brian A. Gordon, Val J. Lowe, Hwamee Oh, David Soleimani‐Meigooni, Pedro Rosa‐Neto, Suzanne L. Baker, Tharick A. Pascoal

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIrritabilityMotor activityHead (geology)Motor controlMotor systemMotor symptoms

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Previous studies demonstrated an association between tau pathology and the development of neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) in individuals with Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, the extent to which tau influences each specific NPS domain remains unclear. Here, we aim to investigate the association of tau and each NPS domain in the AD continuum. We hypothesized that tau plays a comparatively greater effect on the emergence of hyperactive and psychotic symptoms compared to other NPS domains. METHOD: F]MK6240) at the same visit. Tau SUVR values were tailored with a mask from Braak stages I-VI, using the inferior cerebellar gray matter as a reference region. All individuals with dementia had a positive Aß-PET. Voxel-wise and Tobit censored regression tested the association between NPS domains and biomarkers accounting for age, sex, cognitive status, and study site. We used censored regression models to account for skewed data alongside a leave-one-out (loo) approach to identify which NPS domains most contributed to results. RESULT: CI individuals had significantly higher NPI-Q scores and Tau PET SUVR than CU (Figure 1A, 1B). NPI-Q score was significantly associated with tau-PET predominantly in fronto-parietal regions. Removing irritability from the models strengthened this association (Figures 2A-C). Regression loo models revealed that motor disturbances contributed most to the association between NPS and tau-PET across all Braak stages. Notably, irritability had a negative effect on the association in all Braak stages, suggesting that tau does not play a role in the development of irritability and is highly associated with motor disturbances (Figure 3). CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that tau contributes to the development of motor disturbances but has no effect on the development of irritability across the AD continuum. These findings provide additional rationale for the development of new therapeutics aiming to mitigate motor disturbances and irritability in AD patients.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→