Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31481890›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in aging neuroscience2019

Deep Learning in Alzheimer's Disease: Diagnostic Classification and Prognostic Prediction Using Neuroimaging Data.

Taeho Jo, Kwangsik Nho, Andrew J Saykin

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 184 papers, 14 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
184citing papers in PubMed, 14 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

184 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Interpretable machine learning for dementia: A systematic review.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2023
    Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

124 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Taeho JoDepartment of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Center for Neuroimaging, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, United States.
Kwangsik NhoDepartment of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Center for Neuroimaging, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, United States.
Andrew J SaykinDepartment of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Center for Neuroimaging, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, United States.

Funding

Integrating Neuroimaging, Multi-omics, and Clinical Data in Complex DiseaseR01LM012535 · NLM · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI NHO, KWANGSIK TIMOTHY · 2017 to 2021
$1.7M
Neurogenesis in Adult Brain: Gene Networks and Alzheimer’s DiseaseR03AG054936 · NIA · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI NHO, KWANGSIK TIMOTHY · 2017 to 2018
$145k
NIA NIH HHS R03 AG054936
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deep learning, a state-of-the-art machine learning approach, has shown outstanding performance over traditional machine learning in identifying intricate structures in complex high-dimensional data, especially in the domain of computer vision. The application of deep learning to early detection and automated classification of Alzheimer's disease (AD) has recently gained considerable attention, as rapid progress in neuroimaging techniques has generated large-scale multimodal neuroimaging data. A systematic review of publications using deep learning approaches and neuroimaging data for diagnostic classification of AD was performed. A PubMed and Google Scholar search was used to identify deep learning papers on AD published between January 2013 and July 2018. These papers were reviewed, evaluated, and classified by algorithm and neuroimaging type, and the findings were summarized. Of 16 studies meeting full inclusion criteria, 4 used a combination of deep learning and traditional machine learning approaches, and 12 used only deep learning approaches. The combination of traditional machine learning for classification and stacked auto-encoder (SAE) for feature selection produced accuracies of up to 98.8% for AD classification and 83.7% for prediction of conversion from mild cognitive impairment (MCI), a prodromal stage of AD, to AD. Deep learning approaches, such as convolutional neural network (CNN) or recurrent neural network (RNN), that use neuroimaging data without pre-processing for feature selection have yielded accuracies of up to 96.0% for AD classification and 84.2% for MCI conversion prediction. The best classification performance was obtained when multimodal neuroimaging and fluid biomarkers were combined. Deep learning approaches continue to improve in performance and appear to hold promise for diagnostic classification of AD using multimodal neuroimaging data. AD research that uses deep learning is still evolving, improving performance by incorporating additional hybrid data types, such as-omics data, increasing transparency with explainable approaches that add knowledge of specific disease-related features and mechanisms.

Indexed as

Alzheimer's diseaseartificial intelligenceclassificationdeep learningmachine learningmagnetic resonance imagingneuroimagingpositron emission tomography

Identifiers

PMID31481890
PMCPMC6710444

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.