Predictive power of gait and gait-related cognitive measures in amnestic mild cognitive impairment: a machine learning analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Gait disorders and gait-related cognitive tests were recently linked to future Alzheimer's Disease (AD) dementia diagnosis in amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment (aMCI). This study aimed to evaluate the predictive power of gait disorders and gait-related neuropsychological performances for future AD diagnosis in aMCI through machine learning (ML). Methods: A sample of 253 aMCI (stable, converter) individuals were included. We explored the predictive accuracy of four predictors (gait profile plus MMSE, DSST, and TMT-B) previously identified as critical for the conversion from aMCI to AD within a 36-month follow-up. Supervised ML algorithms (Support Vector Machine [SVM], Logistic Regression, and k-Nearest Neighbors) were trained on 70% of the dataset, and feature importance was evaluated for the best algorithm. Results: The SVM algorithm achieved the best performance. The optimized training set performance achieved an accuracy of 0.67 (sensitivity = 0.72; specificity = 0.60), improving to 0.70 on the test set (sensitivity = 0.79; specificity = 0.52). Feature importance revealed MMSE as the most important predictor in both training and testing, while gait type was important in the testing phase. Discussion: We created a predictive ML model that is capable of identifying aMCI at high risk of AD dementia within 36 months. Our ML model could be used to quickly identify individuals at higher risk of AD, facilitating secondary prevention (e.g., cognitive and/or physical training), and serving as screening for more expansive and invasive tests. Lastly, our results point toward theoretically and practically sound evidence of mind and body interaction in AD.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".