MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2998091202 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0226577

The use of back propagation neural networks and 18F-Florbetapir PET for early detection of Alzheimer’s disease using Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative database

2019· article· en· W2998091202 on OpenAlexfundno aff
İlker Özşahin, Boran Şekeroğlu, Greta S. P. Mok

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthEisaiUniversity of California, San DiegoBioClinicaU.S. Department of DefenseAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeNorthern California Institute for Research and EducationF. Hoffmann-La RocheUniversity of Southern CaliforniaBiogenEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers SquibbNational Institute on AgingUniversidade de MacauAlzheimer's AssociationFoundation for the National Institutes of Health
KeywordsNeuroimagingDiseaseAlzheimer's diseaseAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeNeuroscienceMedicinePsychologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Amyloid beta (Aβ) plaques aggregation is considered as the "start" of the degenerative process that manifests years before the clinical symptoms appear in Alzheimer's Disease (AD). The aim of this study is to use back propagation neural networks (BPNNs) in 18F-florbetapir PET data for automated classification of four patient groups including AD, late mild cognitive impairment (LMCI), early mild cognitive impairment (EMCI), and significant memory concern (SMC), versus normal control (NC) for early AD detection. Five hundred images for AD, LMCI, EMCI, SMC, and NC, i.e., 100 images for each group, were used from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) database. The results showed that the automated classification of NC/AD produced a high accuracy of 87.9%, while the results for the prodromal stages of the disease were 66.4%, 60.0%, and 52.9% for NC/LCMI, NC/EMCI and NC/SMC, respectively. The proposed method together with the image preparation steps can be used for early AD detection and classification with high accuracy using Aβ PET dataset.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.163
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.156 · 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

Citations26
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→