Predicting Phenoconversion in Isolated RBD: Machine Learning and Explainable AI Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Isolated rapid eye movement (REM) sleep behavior disorder (iRBD) is recognized as a precursor to neurodegenerative diseases. This study aimed to develop predictive models for the timing and subtype of phenoconversion in iRBD. We analyzed comprehensive clinical data from 178 individuals with iRBD over a median follow-up of 3.6 years and applied machine learning models to predict when phenoconversion would occur and whether progression would present with motor- or cognition-first symptoms. During follow-up, 30 patients developed a neurodegenerative disorder, and the extreme gradient boosting survival embeddings-Kaplan neighbors (XGBSE-KN) model demonstrated the best performance for timing (concordance index: 0.823; integrated Brier score: 0.123). Age, antidepressant use, and Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Part III scores correlated with higher phenoconversion risk, while coffee consumption was protective. For subtype classification, the RandomForestClassifier achieved the highest performance (Matthews correlation coefficient: 0.697), indicating that higher Montreal Cognitive Assessment scores and younger age predicted motor-first progression, whereas longer total sleep time was associated with cognition-first outcomes. These findings highlight the utility of machine learning in guiding prognosis and tailored interventions for iRBD. Future research should include additional biomarkers, extend follow-up, and validate these models in external cohorts to ensure generalizability.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".