Causal Forest Machine Learning Analysis of Parkinson’s Disease in Resting-State Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, Artificial Intelligence has been used to assist healthcare professionals in detecting and diagnosing neurodegenerative diseases. In this study, we propose a methodology to analyze functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging signals and perform classification between Parkinson’s disease patients and healthy participants using Machine Learning algorithms. In addition, the proposed approach provides insights into the brain regions affected by the disease. The functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging from the PPMI and 1000-FCP datasets were pre-processed to extract time series from 200 brain regions per participant, resulting in 11,600 features. Causal Forest and Wrapper Feature Subset Selection algorithms were used for dimensionality reduction, resulting in a subset of features based on their heterogeneity and association with the disease. We utilized Logistic Regression and XGBoost algorithms to perform PD detection, achieving 97.6% accuracy, 97.5% F1 score, 97.9% precision, and 97.7%recall by analyzing sets with fewer than 300 features in a population including men and women. Finally, Multiple Correspondence Analysis was employed to visualize the relationships between brain regions and each group (women with Parkinson, female controls, men with Parkinson, male controls). Associations between the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale questionnaire results and affected brain regions in different groups were also obtained to show another use case of the methodology. This work proposes a methodology to (1) classify patients and controls with Machine Learning and Causal Forest algorithm and (2) visualize associations between brain regions and groups, providing high-accuracy classification and enhanced interpretability of the correlation between specific brain regions and the disease across different groups.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".