MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394928524 · doi:10.3389/fnins.2024.1375395

Predicting the occurrence of mild cognitive impairment in Parkinson’s disease using structural MRI data

2024· article· en· W4394928524 on OpenAlexafffund
Iman Beheshti, Ji Hyun Ko

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neuroscience · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaHealth Sciences Centre
FundersParkinson Canada
KeywordsCognitive impairmentParkinson's diseaseCognitionDiseaseMedicinePsychologyNeuroscienceCognitive psychologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is a common symptom observed in individuals with Parkinson’s disease (PD) and a main risk factor for progressing to dementia. Our objective was to identify early anatomical brain changes that precede the transition from healthy cognition to MCI in PD. Methods Structural T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging data of PD patients with healthy cognition at baseline were downloaded from the Parkinson’s Progression Markers Initiative database. Patients were divided into two groups based on the annual cognitive assessments over a 5-year time span: (i) PD patients with unstable healthy cognition who developed MCI over a 5-year follow-up (PD-UHC, n = 52), and (ii) PD patients who maintained stable healthy cognitive function over the same period (PD-SHC, n = 52). These 52 PD-SHC were selected among 192 PD-SHC patients using propensity score matching method to have similar demographic and clinical characteristics with PD-UHC at baseline. Seventy-five percent of these were used to train a support vector machine (SVM) algorithm to distinguish between the PD-UHC and PD-SHC groups, and tested on the remaining 25% of individuals. Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) feature analysis was utilized to identify the most informative brain regions in SVM classifier. Results The average accuracy of classifying PD-UHC vs. PD-SHC was 80.76%, with 82.05% sensitivity and 79.48% specificity using 10-fold cross-validation. The performance was similar in the hold-out test sets with all accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity at 76.92%. SHAP analysis showed that the most influential brain regions in the prediction model were located in the frontal, occipital, and cerebellar regions as well as midbrain. Discussion Our machine learning-based analysis yielded promising results in identifying PD individuals who are at risk of cognitive decline from the earliest disease stage and revealed the brain regions which may be linked to the prospective cognitive decline in PD before clinical symptoms emerge.

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)0.000
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 score0.417
Threshold uncertainty score0.425

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations12
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeuroscienceSame topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207