Hippocampal‐amygdalo‐ventricular atrophy score: Alzheimer disease detection using normative and pathological lifespan models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, we present an innovative MRI-based method for Alzheimer disease (AD) detection and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) prognostic, using lifespan trajectories of brain structures. After a full screening of the most discriminant structures between AD and normal aging based on MRI volumetric analysis of 3,032 subjects, we propose a novel Hippocampal-Amygdalo-Ventricular Atrophy score (HAVAs) based on normative lifespan models and AD lifespan models. During a validation on three external datasets on 1,039 subjects, our approach showed very accurate detection (AUC ≥ 94%) of patients with AD compared to control subjects and accurate discrimination (AUC = 78%) between progressive MCI and stable MCI (during a 3-year follow-up). Compared to normative modeling, classical machine learning methods and recent state-of-the-art deep learning methods, our method demonstrated better classification performance. Moreover, HAVAs simplicity makes it fully understandable and thus well-suited for clinical practice or future pharmaceutical trials.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".