A Role for Prior Knowledge in Statistical Classification of the Transition from Mild Cognitive Impairment to Alzheimer’s Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The transition from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) to dementia is of great interest to clinical research on Alzheimer's disease and related dementias. This phenomenon also serves as a valuable data source for quantitative methodological researchers developing new approaches for classification. However, the growth of machine learning (ML) approaches for classification may falsely lead many clinical researchers to underestimate the value of logistic regression (LR), which often demonstrates classification accuracy equivalent or superior to other ML methods. Further, when faced with many potential features that could be used for classifying the transition, clinical researchers are often unaware of the relative value of different approaches for variable selection. OBJECTIVE: The present study sought to compare different methods for statistical classification and for automated and theoretically guided feature selection techniques in the context of predicting conversion from MCI to dementia. METHODS: We used data from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) to evaluate different influences of automated feature preselection on LR and support vector machine (SVM) classification methods, in classifying conversion from MCI to dementia. RESULTS: The present findings demonstrate how similar performance can be achieved using user-guided, clinically informed pre-selection versus algorithmic feature selection techniques. CONCLUSION: These results show that although SVM and other ML techniques are capable of relatively accurate classification, similar or higher accuracy can often be achieved by LR, mitigating SVM's necessity or value for many clinical researchers.
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 | 0.029 | 0.147 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".