MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116932221 · doi:10.1002/alz70861_108591

Assessment of visual processing in Alzheimer’s Disease and Lewy Body Dementia using Fast Periodic Visual Stimulation

2025· article· en· W7116932221 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSpatial Neglect and Hemispheric Dysfunction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisual processingDementia with Lewy bodiesLewy bodyDementiaDiseasePerceptionOrientation (vector space)Visual perceptionLewy body disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: It is vital that functional biomarkers of dementia are developed that can identify early cognitive change and stratify cognitive deficits in different aetiologies. Visuoperceptual impairment occurs to varying degrees in Lewy body disease (LBD) and Alzheimer's Disease (AD) and its quantification provides an opportunity to delineate the two diseases. Fast periodic visual stimulation (FPVS) is an electroencephalographic (EEG) marker of discrimination between two classes of frequency-tagged stimuli, that can be adapted to capture different cognitive functions. FPVS tasks provide a rapid (<3mins), objective measure of brain function, implicitly and passively, i.e. the participant is not required to respond or even understand the task. Here, we assess whether FPVS visuoperceptual tasks can differentiate between LBD, AD, and cognitively heathy older adults (HOA). METHOD: Six patients with LBD, nine with AD, and 40 age-matched HOAs, completed FPVS tasks that implicitly measured different forms of visuoperception: orientation discrimination, pseudo-object perception, real object recognition, and positional discrimination. Visuoperception was also assessed behaviourally using the Freiburg Visual Acuity and Contrast Test, and the Visual Object and Space Perception Battery (VOSP). Global cognitive functioning was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Data collection is ongoing with target samples sizes of 20 per patient group. RESULT: Across FPVS tasks, implicit visuoperception was reduced in patients compared to HOAs, with greater impairment observed in LBD than in AD. Per task, the between group performance was: orientation discrimination, HOA > AD > LBD (η2 = .145, p =0.045); pseudo-object perception, HOA > AD > LBD (η2 = .232, p =0.020); real object recognition, HOA > AD = LBD (η2 = .096, p =0.080); positional discrimination, HOA > AD > LBD (η2 = .085, p =0.220). CONCLUSION: FPVS implicitly captures different forms of visuoperception in cognitively healthy older adults and is sensitive to impairment in AD and LDB. Furthermore, the technique can delineate DLB from AD using measures of orientation discrimination, pseudo-object perception and positional discrimination, potentially guiding differential diagnosis.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.540
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.312 · 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