Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35632105›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2022

EEG-Based Alzheimer's Disease Recognition Using Robust-PCA and LSTM Recurrent Neural Network.

Michele Alessandrini, Giorgio Biagetti, Paolo Crippa, Laura Falaschetti, Simona Luzzi, Claudio Turchetti

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Michele AlessandriniDepartment of Information Engineering, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Brecce Bianche 12, I-60131 Ancona, Italy.
Giorgio BiagettiDepartment of Information Engineering, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Brecce Bianche 12, I-60131 Ancona, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6601-0039
Paolo CrippaDepartment of Information Engineering, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Brecce Bianche 12, I-60131 Ancona, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4504-7550
Laura FalaschettiDepartment of Information Engineering, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Brecce Bianche 12, I-60131 Ancona, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3183-7682
Simona LuzziClinica Neurologica, Dipartimento di Medicina Sperimentale e Clinica, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Conca 71, I-60020 Ancona, Italy.
Claudio TurchettiDepartment of Information Engineering, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Brecce Bianche 12, I-60131 Ancona, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-8713-9790

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of electroencephalography (EEG) has recently grown as a means to diagnose neurodegenerative pathologies such as Alzheimer's disease (AD). AD recognition can benefit from machine learning methods that, compared with traditional manual diagnosis methods, have higher reliability and improved recognition accuracy, being able to manage large amounts of data. Nevertheless, machine learning methods may exhibit lower accuracies when faced with incomplete, corrupted, or otherwise missing data, so it is important do develop robust pre-processing techniques do deal with incomplete data. The aim of this paper is to develop an automatic classification method that can still work well with EEG data affected by artifacts, as can arise during the collection with, e.g., a wireless system that can lose packets. We show that a recurrent neural network (RNN) can operate successfully even in the case of significantly corrupted data, when it is pre-filtered by the robust principal component analysis (RPCA) algorithm. RPCA was selected because of its stated ability to remove outliers from the signal. To demonstrate this idea, we first develop an RNN which operates on EEG data, properly processed through traditional PCA; then, we use corrupted data as input and process them with RPCA to filter outlier components, showing that even with data corruption causing up to 20% erasures, the RPCA was able to increase the detection accuracy by about 5% with respect to the baseline PCA.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseAlgorithmsElectroencephalographyHumansNeural Networks, ComputerReproducibility of ResultsAlzheimer’s disease (AD)deep neural network (DNN)electroencephalography (EEG)principal component analysis (PCA)recurrent neural network (RNN)robust PCA (RPCA)

Identifiers

PMID35632105
PMCPMC9145212

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.