MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413907297 · doi:10.1002/alz.70094

Bayesian integration of longitudinal and survival outcomes in Alzheimer's disease prediction

2025· article· en· W4413907297 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Haotian Zou, Michael W. Lutz, Kathleen A. Welsh‐Bohmer, Sheng Luo

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthGenentechIXICOH. Lundbeck A/SServierEisaiNorthern California Institute for Research and EducationPfizerNovartis Pharmaceuticals CorporationUniversity of Southern CaliforniaBiogenEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers SquibbBioClinicaU.S. Department of DefenseAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeMeso Scale DiagnosticsNational Institute on AgingAlzheimer's Association
KeywordsGeneralizability theoryAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeDementiaClinical Dementia RatingMultivariate statisticsNeuroimagingDiseasePopulationPsychologyMedicineComputer scienceMachine learningInternal medicinePsychiatryDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Accurate prediction of Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia onset and progression to mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is crucial for early intervention and clinical trial design. This study presents a predictive framework leveraging Bayesian model averaging (BMA) with a multivariate functional mixed model (MFMM) to integrate multivariate longitudinal outcomes and survival data. METHODS: The training cohort included 1012 participants from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). The validation cohort comprised 2087 participants from the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC). BMA methods, including stacking and pseudo-BMA+, aggregated predictions across candidate models to enhance accuracy and robustness. Predictive performance was evaluated using the C-index, a measure of discrimination. RESULTS: Compared to the composite model, BMA improved prediction accuracy. The C-index was 0.777 (stacking) and 0.771 (pseudo-BMA+) in ADNI and 0.743 and 0.738 in NACC. DISCUSSION: This framework offers a robust tool for personalized medicine, enabling accurate predictions and enhanced generalizability across diverse populations. HIGHLIGHTS: We introduced a novel joint modeling framework integrating multivariate longitudinal outcomes (Mini-Mental State Examination and Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes) with survival data to predict Alzheimer's disease dementia onset and progression. We validated the framework across complementary datasets: Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (training) and National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC; validation), with NACC providing a demographically diverse population to assess generalizability. The model enhanced predictive accuracy using Bayesian model averaging, which synthesizes insights across multiple models to reduce uncertainty and improve robustness. The model demonstrated consistent and clinically relevant performance, supporting its applicability for early intervention, precision medicine, and clinical trial design.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.302 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→