Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36631766›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2023

Machine learning for predicting neurodegenerative diseases in the general older population: a cohort study.

Gloria A Aguayo, Lu Zhang, Michel Vaillant, Moses Ngari, Magali Perquin, Valerie Moran, Laetitia Huiart, Rejko Krüger, Francisco Azuaje, Cyril Ferdynus and 1 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.

Gloria A AguayoDeep Digital Phenotyping Research Unit, Department of Precision Health, Luxembourg Institute of Health, Strassen, Luxembourg. gloria.aguayo@lih.lu.
Lu ZhangBioinformatics Platform, Luxembourg Institute of Health, Strassen, Luxembourg.
Michel VaillantCompetence Center for Methodology and Statistics, Translational Medicine Operations Hub, Luxembourg Institute of Health, Strassen, Luxembourg.
Moses NgariCompetence Center for Methodology and Statistics, Translational Medicine Operations Hub, Luxembourg Institute of Health, Strassen, Luxembourg.
Magali PerquinDepartment of Precision Health, Luxembourg Institute of Health, Strassen, Luxembourg.
Valerie MoranDepartment of Precision Health, Luxembourg Institute of Health, Strassen, Luxembourg.
Laetitia HuiartDepartment of Precision Health, Luxembourg Institute of Health, Strassen, Luxembourg.
Rejko KrügerLCSB, Luxembourg Centre for System Biomedicine, University of Luxembourg, Esch-Sur-Alzette, Luxembourg.
Francisco AzuajeBioinformatics Platform, Luxembourg Institute of Health, Strassen, Luxembourg.
Cyril FerdynusMethodological Support Unit, Félix Guyon University Hospital Center, Saint-Denis, La Réunion, France.
Guy FagherazziDeep Digital Phenotyping Research Unit, Department of Precision Health, Luxembourg Institute of Health, Strassen, Luxembourg.
Luxembourg Institute of Health · LUCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de La Réunion · FRGenomics England · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the older general population, neurodegenerative diseases (NDs) are associated with increased disability, decreased physical and cognitive function. Detecting risk factors can help implement prevention measures. Using deep neural networks (DNNs), a machine-learning algorithm could be an alternative to Cox regression in tabular datasets with many predictive features. We aimed to compare the performance of different types of DNNs with regularized Cox proportional hazards models to predict NDs in the older general population.

methodsWe performed a longitudinal analysis with participants of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. We included men and women with no NDs at baseline, aged 60 years and older, assessed every 2 years from 2004 to 2005 (wave2) to 2016-2017 (wave 8). The features were a set of 91 epidemiological and clinical baseline variables. The outcome was new events of Parkinson's, Alzheimer or dementia. After applying multiple imputations, we trained three DNN algorithms: Feedforward, TabTransformer, and Dense Convolutional (Densenet). In addition, we trained two algorithms based on Cox models: Elastic Net regularization (CoxEn) and selected features (CoxSf).

results5433 participants were included in wave 2. During follow-up, 12.7% participants developed NDs. Although the five models predicted NDs events, the discriminative ability was superior using TabTransformer (Uno's C-statistic (coefficient (95% confidence intervals)) 0.757 (0.702, 0.805). TabTransformer showed superior time-dependent balanced accuracy (0.834 (0.779, 0.889)) and specificity (0.855 (0.0.773, 0.909)) than the other models. With the CoxSf (hazard ratio (95% confidence intervals)), age (10.0 (6.9, 14.7)), poor hearing (1.3 (1.1, 1.5)) and weight loss 1.3 (1.1, 1.6)) were associated with a higher DNN risk. In contrast, executive function (0.3 (0.2, 0.6)), memory (0, 0, 0.1)), increased gait speed (0.2, (0.1, 0.4)), vigorous physical activity (0.7, 0.6, 0.9)) and higher BMI (0.4 (0.2, 0.8)) were associated with a lower DNN risk.

conclusionTabTransformer is promising for prediction of NDs with heterogeneous tabular datasets with numerous features. Moreover, it can handle censored data. However, Cox models perform well and are easier to interpret than DNNs. Therefore, they are still a good choice for NDs.

Indexed as

Neurodegenerative DiseasesAgedCohort StudiesFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMachine LearningMaleMiddle AgedNeural Networks, ComputerAlzheimerCox modelsDeep neural networksDementiaOlder general populationParkinson diseasePredictionTabular data

Identifiers

PMID36631766
PMCPMC9832793
OpenAlexW4315649264

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.