Identifying key multi-modal predictors of incipient dementia in Parkinson’s disease: a machine learning analysis and Tree SHAP interpretation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Persons with Parkinson's disease (PD) differentially progress to cognitive impairment and dementia. With a 3-year longitudinal sample of initially non-demented PD patients measured on multiple dementia risk factors, we demonstrate that machine learning classifier algorithms can be combined with explainable artificial intelligence methods to identify and interpret leading predictors that discriminate those who later converted to dementia from those who did not. Method: = 4.8; 44% female). We tested 38 multi-modal predictors from 10 domains (e.g., motor, cognitive) in a computationally competitive context to identify those that best discriminated two unobserved baseline groups, PD No Dementia (PDND), and PD Incipient Dementia (PDID). We used Random Forest (RF) classifier models for the discrimination goal and Tree SHapley Additive exPlanation (Tree SHAP) values for deep interpretation. Results: = 0.76). Tree SHAP showed that ten leading predictors of PDID accounted for 62.5% of the model, as well as their relative importance, direction, and magnitude (risk threshold). These predictors represented the motor (e.g., poorer gait), cognitive (e.g., slower Trail A), molecular (up-regulated metabolite panel), demographic (age), imaging (ventricular volume), and lifestyle (activities of daily living) domains. Conclusion: Our data-driven protocol integrated RF classifier models and Tree SHAP applications to selectively identify and interpret early dementia risk factors in a well-characterized sample of initially non-demented persons with PD. Results indicate that leading dementia predictors derive from multiple complementary risk domains.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".