Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33970122›Full record

ArticleJMIR mental health2021

Learning From Clinical Consensus Diagnosis in India to Facilitate Automatic Classification of Dementia: Machine Learning Study.

Haomiao Jin, Sandy Chien, Erik Meijer, Pranali Khobragade, Jinkook Lee

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mental health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Missing data and imputation in the international studies following the Harmonized Cognitive Assessment Protocol.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Haomiao JinCenter for Economic and Social Research, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8908-1959
Sandy ChienCenter for Economic and Social Research, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4753-4109
Erik MeijerCenter for Economic and Social Research, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7959-4670
Pranali KhobragadeCenter for Economic and Social Research, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1117-1177
Jinkook LeeCenter for Economic and Social Research, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6209-719X
University of Southern California · US

Funding

Leveraging a natural experiment to estimate the causal impact of blood sugar on dementia and cognition in IndiaR01AG051125 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI Jinkook Lee · 2015 to 2026
$26.8M
Harmonized Diagnostic Assessment of Dementia (DAD) for Longitudinal Aging Study of India (LASI)-Genomic study.U01AG064948 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI KARDIA, SHARON L, LEE, JINKOOK · 2019 to 2023
$12.5M
Modifiable Protective and Risk Factors of Late-Life Cognitive Health and DementiaRF1AG055273 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI LANGA, KENNETH M, LEE, JINKOOK · 2017 to 2017
$4.0M
NIA NIH HHS R01 AG051125NIA NIH HHS RF1 AG055273NIA NIH HHS U01 AG064948
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Harmonized Diagnostic Assessment of Dementia for the Longitudinal Aging Study in India (LASI-DAD) is the first and only nationally representative study on late-life cognition and dementia in India (n=4096). LASI-DAD obtained clinical consensus diagnosis of dementia for a subsample of 2528 respondents.

objectiveThis study develops a machine learning model that uses data from the clinical consensus diagnosis in LASI-DAD to support the classification of dementia status.

methodsClinicians were presented with the extensive data collected from LASI-DAD, including sociodemographic information and health history of respondents, results from the screening tests of cognitive status, and information obtained from informant interviews. Based on the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) and using an online platform, clinicians individually evaluated each case and then reached a consensus diagnosis. A 2-step procedure was implemented to train several candidate machine learning models, which were evaluated using a separate test set for predictive accuracy measurement, including the area under receiver operating curve (AUROC), accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, precision, F1 score, and kappa statistic. The ultimate model was selected based on overall agreement as measured by kappa. We further examined the overall accuracy and agreement with the final consensus diagnoses between the selected machine learning model and individual clinicians who participated in the clinical consensus diagnostic process. Finally, we applied the selected model to a subgroup of LASI-DAD participants for whom the clinical consensus diagnosis was not obtained to predict their dementia status.

resultsAmong the 2528 individuals who received clinical consensus diagnosis, 192 (6.7% after adjusting for sampling weight) were diagnosed with dementia. All candidate machine learning models achieved outstanding discriminative ability, as indicated by AUROC >.90, and had similar accuracy and specificity (both around 0.95). The support vector machine model outperformed other models with the highest sensitivity (0.81), F1 score (0.72), and kappa (.70, indicating substantial agreement) and the second highest precision (0.65). As a result, the support vector machine was selected as the ultimate model. Further examination revealed that overall accuracy and agreement were similar between the selected model and individual clinicians. Application of the prediction model on 1568 individuals without clinical consensus diagnosis classified 127 individuals as living with dementia. After applying sampling weight, we can estimate the prevalence of dementia in the population as 7.4%.

conclusionsThe selected machine learning model has outstanding discriminative ability and substantial agreement with a clinical consensus diagnosis of dementia. The model can serve as a computer model of the clinical knowledge and experience encoded in the clinical consensus diagnostic process and has many potential applications, including predicting missed dementia diagnoses and serving as a clinical decision support tool or virtual rater to assist diagnosis of dementia.

Indexed as

Alzheimer diseaseartificial intelligenceclassificationdementiadiagnosisIndiamachine learningmodel

Identifiers

PMID33970122
PMCPMC8145077
OpenAlexW3153436665

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.