Neuroimaging and machine learning for studying the pathways from mild cognitive impairment to alzheimer’s disease: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This systematic review synthesizes the most recent neuroimaging procedures and machine learning approaches for the prediction of conversion from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer's disease dementia. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, SCOPUS, and Web of Science databases following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) systematic review guidelines. RESULTS: Our search returned 2572 articles, 56 of which met the criteria for inclusion in the final selection. The multimodality framework and deep learning techniques showed potential for predicting the conversion of MCI to AD dementia. CONCLUSION: Findings of this systematic review identified that the possibility of using neuroimaging data processed by advanced learning algorithms is promising for the prediction of AD progression. We also provided a detailed description of the challenges that researchers are faced along with future research directions. The protocol has been registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews- CRD42019133402 and published in the Systematic Reviews journal.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".