An evaluation of volume-based morphometry for prediction of mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Voxel-based morphometry from conventional T1-weighted images has proved effective to quantify Alzheimer's disease (AD) related brain atrophy and to enable fairly accurate automated classification of AD patients, mild cognitive impaired patients (MCI) and elderly controls. Little is known, however, about the classification power of volume-based morphometry, where features of interest consist of a few brain structure volumes (e.g. hippocampi, lobes, ventricles) as opposed to hundreds of thousands of voxel-wise gray matter concentrations. In this work, we experimentally evaluate two distinct volume-based morphometry algorithms (FreeSurfer and an in-house algorithm called MorphoBox) for automatic disease classification on a standardized data set from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Results indicate that both algorithms achieve classification accuracy comparable to the conventional whole-brain voxel-based morphometry pipeline using SPM for AD vs elderly controls and MCI vs controls, and higher accuracy for classification of AD vs MCI and early vs late AD converters, thereby demonstrating the potential of volume-based morphometry to assist diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".