MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366134159 · doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2023.103405

Explainable classification of Parkinson’s disease using deep learning trained on a large multi-center database of T1-weighted MRI datasets

2023· article· en· W4366134159 on OpenAlexafffund
Milton Camacho, Matthias Wilms, Pauline Mouchès, Hannes Almgren, Raissa Souza, Richard Camicioli, Zahinoor Ismail, Oury Monchi, Nils D. Forkert

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImage Clinical · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de MontréalHotchkiss Brain InstituteWomen and Children’s Health Research InstituteOntario Brain InstituteAlberta Children's HospitalUniversité de MontréalUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Institute on AgingCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthCanada Research ChairsNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringCalgary FoundationConsortium canadien en neurodégénérescence associée au vieillissementCanadian Open Neuroscience PlatformNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesMichael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceConvolutional neural networkComputer scienceTest setPattern recognition (psychology)Magnetic resonance imagingDeep learningMachine learningMedicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Parkinson's disease (PD) is a severe neurodegenerative disease that affects millions of people. Early diagnosis is important to facilitate prompt interventions to slow down disease progression. However, accurate PD diagnosis can be challenging, especially in the early disease stages. The aim of this work was to develop and evaluate a robust explainable deep learning model for PD classification trained from one of the largest collections of T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging datasets. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 2,041 T1-weighted MRI datasets from 13 different studies were collected, including 1,024 datasets from PD patients and 1,017 datasets from age- and sex-matched healthy controls (HC). The datasets were skull stripped, resampled to isotropic resolution, bias field corrected, and non-linearly registered to the MNI PD25 atlas. The Jacobian maps derived from the deformation fields together with basic clinical parameters were used to train a state-of-the-art convolutional neural network (CNN) to classify PD and HC subjects. Saliency maps were generated to display the brain regions contributing the most to the classification task as a means of explainable artificial intelligence. RESULTS: The CNN model was trained using an 85%/5%/10% train/validation/test split stratified by diagnosis, sex, and study. The model achieved an accuracy of 79.3%, precision of 80.2%, specificity of 81.3%, sensitivity of 77.7%, and AUC-ROC of 0.87 on the test set while performing similarly on an independent test set. Saliency maps computed for the test set data highlighted frontotemporal regions, the orbital-frontal cortex, and multiple deep gray matter structures as most important. CONCLUSION: The developed CNN model, trained on a large heterogenous database, was able to differentiate PD patients from HC subjects with high accuracy with clinically feasible classification explanations. Future research should aim to investigate the combination of multiple imaging modalities with deep learning and on validating these results in a prospective trial as a clinical decision support system.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations74
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroImage ClinicalSame topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207