Machine learning based on Optical Coherence Tomography images as a diagnostic tool for Alzheimer's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aims We mainly evaluate retinal alterations in Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients, investigate the associations between retinal changes with AD biomarkers, and explore an optimal machine learning (ML) model for AD diagnosis based on retinal thickness. Methods A total of 159 AD patients and 299 healthy controls were enrolled. The retinal parameters of each participant were measured using optical coherence tomography (OCT). Additionally, cognitive impairment severity, brain atrophy, and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers were measured in AD patients. Results AD patients demonstrated a significant decrease in the average, superior, and inferior quadrant peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer, macular retinal nerve fiber layer, ganglion cell layer (GCL), inner plexiform layer (IPL) thicknesses, as well as total macular volume (TMV) (all p < 0.05). Moreover, TMV was positively associated with Mini‐Mental State Examination and Montreal Cognitive Assessment scores, IPL thickness was correlated negatively with the medial temporal lobe atrophy score, and the GCL thickness was positively correlated with CSF Aβ42/Aβ40 and negatively associated with p‐tau level. Based on the significantly decreased OCT variables between both groups, the XGBoost algorithm exhibited the best diagnostic performance for AD, whose four references, including accuracy, area under the curve, f1 score, and recall, ranged from 0.69 to 0.74. Moreover, the macular retinal thickness exhibited an absolute superiority for AD diagnosis compared with other enrolled variables in all ML models. Conclusion We identified the retinal alterations in AD patients and found that macular thickness and volume were associated with AD severity and biomarkers. Furthermore, we confirmed that OCT combined with ML could serve as a potential diagnostic tool for AD.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".