MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7117260418 · doi:10.1002/alz70857_103284

A univariate and network analysis approach to studying connected speech in Subjective Cognitive Decline

2025· article· en· W7117260418 on OpenAlexaff
Sophie Pellerin, Simona M. Brambati

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Canadian institutionsInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de MontréalUniversité de MontréalInternational Centre for Comparative Criminology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNetwork analysisCognitive declineUnivariateCognitionSemantic networkSemantic analysis (machine learning)Lexical analysisUnivariate analysisConnected speech

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Widespread Connected Speech (CS) changes (e.g., slower speech rate, more word repetitions, lower lexical diversity, reduced syntactic complexity) have been documented in Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI). Nevertheless, the CS profile of individuals with Subjective Cognitive Decline (SCD; who are often considered to be at an even earlier stage of Alzheimer's disease (AD)), potential relationships between CS features in SCD, and how CS samples produced by individuals with SCD compare to those produced by controls and individuals with MCI remain unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the CS features and relationships between these features in SCD to those of controls and individuals with MCI. METHOD: Thirty CS features, part of all CS domains (e.g., fluency (e.g., filled pauses), lexical (e.g., word frequency), syntactic (e.g., subordinate clauses)) were extracted using Natural Language Processing techniques from the CS samples of 156 controls, 109 individuals with SCD, and 239 individuals with MCI. Groups were compared using ANCOVA models on the extracted CS features. Gaussian Graphical Models were then used to construct a CS network for each group with the CS features. RESULT: The ANCOVA analyses showed an increased speech rate (versus controls and individuals with MCI) and a lower local coherence (versus controls) in SCD. Moreover, our network analysis revealed increased (e.g., proportion of nouns, semantic idea density), decreased (e.g., proportions of pronouns and verbs), or intermediate (e.g., word valence) standardized node strength centralities in the SCD network compared to the Control and MCI networks. Examination of prominent edges in the SCD network revealed a similar pattern, with some increased (e.g., word frequency - noun valence), decreased (e.g., number of words - efficiency), and intermediate weights (e.g., word frequency - noun frequency) compared to the other networks. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest subtle CS changes in SCD, mainly in the lexical and semantic domains. Furthermore, our network analysis demonstrates that SCD represents an intermediate stage between healthy aging and MCI. Finally, we show that network analysis helps gain a different and more in-depth understanding of CS in the early stages of the AD continuum.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 topicNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism→French-language works237,207→