MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4311446661 · doi:10.1088/1361-6560/acaba6

Application of novel hybrid machine learning systems and radiomics features for non-motor outcome prediction in Parkinson’s disease

2022· article· en· W4311446661 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mohammad R. Salmanpour, Mahya Bakhtiyari, Mahdi Hosseinzadeh, Mehdi Maghsudi, Fereshteh Yousefirizi, Mohammad Mehdi Ghaemi, Arman Rahmim

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentArtificial intelligenceFeature selectionMachine learningComputer scienceDementiaBridging (networking)PopulationDiseaseMultivariate statisticsMedical diagnosisMedicineInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objectives. Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a complex neurodegenerative disorder, affecting 2%–3% of the elderly population. Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), a rapid nonmotor screening test, assesses different cognitive dysfunctionality aspects. Early MoCA prediction may facilitate better temporal therapy and disease control. Radiomics features (RF), in addition to clinical features (CF), are indicated to increase clinical diagnoses, etc, bridging between medical imaging procedures and personalized medicine. We investigate the effect of RFs, CFs, and conventional imaging features (CIF) to enhance prediction performance using hybrid machine learning systems (HMLS). Methods. We selected 210 patients with 981 features (CFs, CIFs, and RFs) from the Parkinson’s Progression-Markers-Initiative database. We generated 4 datasets, namely using (i), (ii) year-0 (D1) or year-1 (D2) features, (iii) longitudinal data (D3, putting datasets in years 0 and 1 longitudinally next to each other), and (iv) timeless data (D4, effectively doubling dataset size by listing both datasets from years 0 and 1 separately). First, we directly applied 23 predictor algorithms (PA) to the datasets to predict year-4 MoCA, which PD patients this year have a higher dementia risk. Subsequently, HMLSs, including 14 attribute extraction and 10 feature selection algorithms followed by PAs were employed to enhance prediction performances. 80% of all datapoints were utilized to select the best model based on minimum mean absolute error (MAE) resulting from 5-fold cross-validation. Subsequently, the remaining 20% was used for hold-out testing of the selected models. Results. When applying PAs without ASAs/FEAs to datasets (MoCA outcome range: [11,30]), Adaboost achieved an MAE of 1.74 ± 0.29 on D4 with a hold-out testing performance of 1.71. When employing HMLSs, D4 + Minimum_Redundancy_Maximum_Relevance (MRMR)+K_Nearest_Neighbor Regressor achieved the highest performance of 1.05 ± 0.25 with a hold-out testing performance of 0.57. Conclusion. Our study shows the importance of using larger datasets (timeless), and utilizing optimized HMLSs, for significantly improved prediction of MoCA in PD patients.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.069
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and Biology→Same topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments→French-language works237,207→