MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405376357 · doi:10.7717/peerj.18490

A machine learning approach for identifying anatomical biomarkers of early mild cognitive impairment

2024· article· en· W4405376357 on OpenAlexafffund
Alwani Liyana Ahmad, José M. Sánchez‐Bornot, Roberto C. Sotero, Damien Coyle, Zamzuri Idris, Ibrahima Faye

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthGenentechIXICOH. Lundbeck A/SServierAlberta InnovatesEisaiNorthern California Institute for Research and EducationDoD Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeBioClinicaBiogenPfizerNovartis Pharmaceuticals CorporationUniversity of Southern CaliforniaEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilUniversiti Sains MalaysiaBristol-Myers SquibbEli Lilly and CompanyAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeMeso Scale DiagnosticsNational Institute on AgingUniversiti Teknologi PetronasAlzheimer's Association
KeywordsFeature selectionAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeArtificial intelligenceNeuroimagingReceiver operating characteristicComputer scienceMachine learningDementiaMedicinePattern recognition (psychology)DiseasePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Alzheimer's Disease (AD) poses a major challenge as a neurodegenerative disorder, and early detection is critical for effective intervention. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a critical tool in AD research due to its availability and cost-effectiveness in clinical settings. Objective: This study aims to conduct a comprehensive analysis of machine learning (ML) methods for MRI-based biomarker selection and classification to investigate early cognitive decline in AD. The focus to discriminate between classifying healthy control (HC) participants who remained stable and those who developed mild cognitive impairment (MCI) within five years (unstable HC or uHC). Methods: 3-Tesla (3T) MRI data from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) and Open Access Series of Imaging Studies 3 (OASIS-3) were used, focusing on HC and uHC groups. Freesurfer's recon-all and other tools were used to extract anatomical biomarkers from subcortical and cortical brain regions. ML techniques were applied for feature selection and classification, using the MATLAB Classification Learner (MCL) app for initial analysis, followed by advanced methods such as nested cross-validation and Bayesian optimization, which were evaluated within a Monte Carlo replication analysis as implemented in our customized pipeline. Additionally, polynomial regression-based data harmonization techniques were used to enhance ML and statistical analysis. In our study, ML classifiers were evaluated using performance metrics such as Accuracy (Acc), area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AROC), F1-score, and a normalized Matthew's correlation coefficient (MCC'). Results: -score harmonization and ReliefF feature selection performed best (Acc = 69.17%, AROC = 77.73%, F1 = 69.21%, MCC' = 69.28%). For OASIS-3 balanced datasets, SVM with zscore-corrected data outperformed others (Acc = 66.58%, AROC = 72.01%, MCC' = 66.78%), while logistic regression had the best F1-score (66.68%). In imbalanced data, RUSBoost showed the strongest overall performance on ADNI (F1 = 50.60%, AROC = 81.54%) and OASIS-3 (MCC' = 63.31%). Support vector machine (SVM) excelled on ADNI in terms of Acc (82.93%) and MCC' (70.21%), while naïve Bayes performed best on OASIS-3 by F1 (42.54%) and AROC (70.33%). Conclusion: -score harmonization yielding the best results. This study also highlights the importance of nested cross-validation (CV) to control overfitting and the potential of a semi-automatic pipeline for early AD detection using MRI, with future applications integrating other neuroimaging data to enhance prediction.

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 score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score0.529

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeerJSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207