Combining anatomical, diffusion, and resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging for individual classification of mild and moderate Alzheimer's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is sensitive to structural and functional changes in the brain caused by Alzheimer's disease (AD), and can therefore be used to help in diagnosing the disease. Improving classification of AD patients based on MRI scans might help to identify AD earlier in the disease's progress, which may be key in developing treatments for AD. In this study we used an elastic net classifier based on several measures derived from the MRI scans of mild to moderate AD patients (N = 77) from the prospective registry on dementia study and controls (N = 173) from the Austrian Stroke Prevention Family Study. We based our classification on measures from anatomical MRI, diffusion weighted MRI and resting state functional MRI. Our unimodal classification performance ranged from an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.760 (full correlations between functional networks) to 0.909 (grey matter density). When combining measures from multiple modalities in a stepwise manner, the classification performance improved to an AUC of 0.952. This optimal combination consisted of grey matter density, white matter density, fractional anisotropy, mean diffusivity, and sparse partial correlations between functional networks. Classification performance for mild AD as well as moderate AD also improved when using this multimodal combination. We conclude that different MRI modalities provide complementary information for classifying AD. Moreover, combining multiple modalities can substantially improve classification performance over unimodal classification.
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 | 0.009 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".