ArticleHuman brain mapping2016
Making use of longitudinal information in pattern recognition.
Article in Human brain mapping, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Essential New Complexity-Based Themes for Patient-Centered Diagnosis and Treatment of Dementia and Predementia in Older People: Multimorbidity and Multilevel Phenomenology.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Machine Learning Classification Identifies Cerebellar Contributions to Early and Moderate Cognitive Decline in Alzheimer's Disease.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2020Article
- Methodological considerations for developmental longitudinal fMRI research.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Longitudinal designs are widely used in medical studies as a means of observing within-subject changes over time in groups of subjects, thereby aiming to improve sensitivity for detecting disease effects. Paralleling an increased use of such studies in neuroimaging has been the adoption of pattern recognition algorithms for making individualized predictions of disease. However, at present few pattern recognition methods exist to make full use of neuroimaging data that have been collected longitudinally, with most methods relying instead on cross-sectional style analysis. This article presents a principal component analysis-based feature construction method that uses longitudinal high-dimensional data to improve predictive performance of pattern recognition algorithms. The method can be applied to data from a wide range of longitudinal study designs and permits an arbitrary number of time-points per subject. We apply the method to two longitudinal datasets, one containing subjects with mild cognitive impairment along with healthy controls, the other with early dementia subjects and healthy controls. Across both datasets, we show improvements in predictive accuracy relative to cross-sectional classifiers for discriminating disease subjects from healthy controls on the basis of whole-brain structural magnetic resonance image-based voxels. In addition, we can transfer longitudinal information from one set of subjects to make disease predictions in another set of subjects. The proposed method is simple and, as a feature construction method, flexible with respect to the choice of classifier and image registration algorithm. Hum Brain Mapp 37:4385-4404, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.