MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386895318 · doi:10.3390/app131810470

Enhancing Early Dementia Detection: A Machine Learning Approach Leveraging Cognitive and Neuroimaging Features for Optimal Predictive Performance

2023· article· en· W4386895318 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Muhammad Irfan, Seyed Shahrestani, Mahmoud Elkhodr

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthGenentechIXICOH. Lundbeck A/SServierEisaiJanssen Alzheimer Immunotherapy Research And DevelopmentNorthern California Institute for Research and EducationPfizerNovartis Pharmaceuticals CorporationF. Hoffmann-La RocheUniversity of Southern CaliforniaBristol-Myers SquibbEli Lilly and CompanyBiogenBioClinicaAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeMeso Scale DiagnosticsAlzheimer's Association
KeywordsMachine learningArtificial intelligenceDementiaNeuroimagingComputer scienceSupport vector machineCognitionAdaBoostArtificial neural networkBenchmark (surveying)Naive Bayes classifierPsychologyDiseaseMedicineNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dementia, including Alzheimer’s Disease (AD), is a complex condition, and early detection remains a formidable challenge due to limited patient records and uncertainty in identifying relevant features. This paper proposes a machine learning approach to address this issue, utilizing cognitive and neuroimaging features for training predictive models. This study highlighted the viability of cognitive test scores in dementia detection—a procedure that offers the advantage of simplicity. The AdaBoost Ensemble model, trained on cognitive features, displayed a robust performance with an accuracy rate of approximately 83%. Notably, this model surpassed benchmark models such as the Artificial Neural Network, Support Vector Machine, and Naïve Bayes. This study underscores the potential of cognitive tests and machine learning for early dementia detection.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.200
Threshold uncertainty score0.767

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207