MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402444602 · doi:10.3390/app14188149

Machine Learning for Prediction of Cognitive Deterioration in Patients with Early Parkinson’s Disease

2024· article· en· W4402444602 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maitane Martinez-Eguiluz, Olatz Arbelaitz, Ibai Gurrutxaga, Javier Muguerza, Juan Carlos Gómez‐Esteban, Iñigo Gabilondo, Ane Murueta‐Goyena

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Regional Development FundMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónEusko Jaurlaritza
KeywordsParkinson's diseaseMedicineDiseasePsychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a neurodegenerative disorder marked by motor and cognitive impairments. The early prediction of cognitive deterioration in PD is crucial. This work aims to predict the change in the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) at years 4 and 5 from baseline in the Parkinson’s Progression Markers Initiative database. The predictors included demographic and clinical variables: motor and non-motor symptoms from the baseline visit and change scores from baseline to the first-year follow-up. Various regression models were compared, and SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations) values were used to assess domain importance, while model coefficients evaluated variable importance. The LASSOLARS algorithm outperforms other models, achieving lowest the MAE, 1.55±0.23 and 1.56±0.19, for the fourth- and fifth-year predictions, respectively. Moreover, when trained to predict the average MoCA score change across both time points, its performance improved, reducing its MAE by 19%. Baseline MoCA scores and MoCA deterioration over the first-year were the most influential predictors of PD (highest model coefficients). However, the cumulative effect of other cognitive variables also contributed significantly. This study demonstrates that mid-term cognitive deterioration in PD can be accurately predicted from patients’ baseline cognitive performance and short-term cognitive deterioration, along with a few easily measurable clinical measurements.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207