ArticleNeuroImage2022
Late combination shows that MEG adds to MRI in classifying MCI versus controls.
Article in NeuroImage, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- From Single-Modal to Multi-Modal Artificial Intelligence in Alzheimer's Disease: A Systematic Review of Databases, Modalities, Diagnostic Performance, and Clinical Translation Challenges.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Pooled it
- Tracking electrophysiological signatures of Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review of multimodal studies.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Pooled it
- AI-driven magnetoencephalography biomarkers in dementia risk prediction: current evidence, challenges and future perspectives.Frontiers in dementia · 2026Review
- Exploring the neuromagnetic signatures of cognitive decline from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer's disease dementia.EBioMedicine · 2025Article
- Predicting individual traits from models of brain dynamics accurately and reliably using the Fisher kernel.eLife · 2025Article
- Stacking models of brain dynamics to improve prediction of subject traits in fMRI.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Enhancing early Alzheimer's disease classification accuracy through the fusion of sMRI and rsMEG data: a deep learning approach.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Article
- Deep Multi-Branch CNN Architecture for Early Alzheimer's Detection from Brain MRIs.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Neurophysiological consequences of synapse loss in progressive supranuclear palsy.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2023Article
- Combining aperiodic 1/f slopes and brain simulation: An EEG/MEG proxy marker of excitation/inhibition imbalance in Alzheimer's disease.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Early detection of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is essential for developing effective treatments. Neuroimaging techniques like Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) have the potential to detect brain changes before symptoms emerge. Structural MRI can detect atrophy related to AD, but it is possible that functional changes are observed even earlier. We therefore examined the potential of Magnetoencephalography (MEG) to detect differences in functional brain activity in people with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) - a state at risk of early AD. We introduce a framework for multimodal combination to ask whether MEG data from a resting-state provides complementary information beyond structural MRI data in the classification of MCI versus controls. More specifically, we used multi-kernel learning of support vector machines to classify 163 MCI cases versus 144 healthy elderly controls from the BioFIND dataset. When using the covariance of planar gradiometer data in the low Gamma range (30-48 Hz), we found that adding a MEG kernel improved classification accuracy above kernels that captured several potential confounds (e.g., age, education, time-of-day, head motion). However, accuracy using MEG alone (68%) was worse than MRI alone (71%). When simply concatenating (normalized) features from MEG and MRI into one kernel (Early combination), there was no advantage of combining MEG with MRI versus MRI alone. When combining kernels of modality-specific features (Intermediate combination), there was an improvement in multimodal classification to 74%. The biggest multimodal improvement however occurred when we combined kernels from the predictions of modality-specific classifiers (Late combination), which achieved 77% accuracy (a reliable improvement in terms of permutation testing). We also explored other MEG features, such as the variance versus covariance of magnetometer versus planar gradiometer data within each of 6 frequency bands (delta, theta, alpha, beta, low gamma, or high gamma), and found that they generally provided complementary information for classification above MRI. We conclude that MEG can improve on the MRI-based classification of MCI.
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.