Machine‐learning‐based Alzheimer's disease dementia score using structural MRI neurodegeneration patterns: Independent validation on ADNI, AIBL, OASIS and MIRIAD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Biomarkers for dementia of Alzheimer's type (DAT) are sought to facilitate accurate prediction of the disease onset, ideally predating the onset of cognitive deterioration. T1‐weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a commonly used neuroimaging modality for measuring brain structure in‐vivo, potentially providing information enabling the design of biomarkers for DAT. Method We propose a novel biomarker using structural MRI volume‐based features to compute a similarity score for the individual's structural patterns relative to those observed in the DAT group. We employed ensemble learning framework that combines structural features in most discriminative ROIs to create an aggregate measure of neurodegeneration in the brain. This classifier is trained on 423 stable normal control (NC) and 330 DAT subjects, where clinical diagnosis is likely to have the highest certainty, and then validated on several independent datasets for subjects at various stages along the longitudinal trajectory from NC to DAT. Result Independent validation on 8834 un‐seen images from ADNI, AIBL, OASIS, MIRIAD Alzheimer's disease (AD) databases showed promising potential to predict the development of DAT depending on the time‐to‐conversion (TTC). Classification performance on stable versus progressive mild cognitive impairment (MCI) groups achieved an AUC of 0.81 for TTC of 6 months, and 0.73 for TTC of up to 7 years, achieving the state‐of‐the‐art results. Conclusion We propose and validate a novel ensemble‐learning based biomarker score based on 3D topographic patterns of MRI‐observed structural volumetric features. The output score, indicating similarity to patterns seen in DAT, provides an intuitive measure of how closely the individual's brain features resemble the DAT group. This score can be used for assessing the presence of AD structural atrophy patterns in normal aging and MCI stages, as well as monitoring the progression of the individual's brain along the disease course.
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 | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".