Development of a Machine Learning Model to Discriminate Mild Cognitive Impairment Subjects from Normal Controls in Community Screening
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is a transitional stage between normal aging and probable Alzheimer’s disease. It is of great value to screen for MCI in the community. A novel machine learning (ML) model is composed of electroencephalography (EEG), eye tracking (ET), and neuropsychological assessments. This study has been proposed to identify MCI subjects from normal controls (NC). Methods: Two cohorts were used in this study. Cohort 1 as the training and validation group, includes184 MCI patients and 152 NC subjects. Cohort 2 as an independent test group, includes 44 MCI and 48 NC individuals. EEG, ET, Neuropsychological Tests Battery (NTB), and clinical variables with age, gender, educational level, MoCA-B, and ACE-R were selected for all subjects. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were adopted to evaluate the capabilities of this tool to classify MCI from NC. The clinical model, the EEG and ET model, and the neuropsychological model were compared. Results: We found that the classification accuracy of the proposed model achieved 84.5 ± 4.43% and 88.8 ± 3.59% in Cohort 1 and Cohort 2, respectively. The area under curve (AUC) of the proposed tool achieved 0.941 (0.893–0.982) in Cohort 1 and 0.966 (0.921–0.988) in Cohort 2, respectively. Conclusions: The proposed model incorporation of EEG, ET, and neuropsychological assessments yielded excellent classification performances, suggesting its potential for future application in cognitive decline prediction.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".