ArticleNeuroImage2023
Deep learning classification of reading disability with regional brain volume features.
Article in NeuroImage, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Encoding models for developmental cognitive computational neuroscience: Promise, challenges, and potential.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2024Review
- Distinct connectivity patterns between perception and attention-related brain networks characterize dyslexia: Machine learning applied to resting-state fMRI.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2024Article
- From brain to education through machine learning: Predicting literacy and numeracy skills from neuroimaging data.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Developmental reading disability is a prevalent and often enduring problem with varied mechanisms that contribute to its phenotypic heterogeneity. This mechanistic and phenotypic variation, as well as relatively modest sample sizes, may have limited the development of accurate neuroimaging-based classifiers for reading disability, including because of the large feature space of neuroimaging datasets. An unsupervised learning model was used to reduce deformation-based data to a lower-dimensional manifold and then supervised learning models were used to classify these latent representations in a dataset of 96 reading disability cases and 96 controls (mean age: 9.86 ± 1.56 years). A combined unsupervised autoencoder and supervised convolutional neural network approach provided an effective classification of cases and controls (accuracy: 77%; precision: 0.75; recall: 0.78). Brain regions that contributed to this classification accuracy were identified by adding noise to the voxel-level image data, which showed that reading disability classification accuracy was most influenced by the superior temporal sulcus, dorsal cingulate, and lateral occipital cortex. Regions that were most important for the accurate classification of controls included the supramarginal gyrus, orbitofrontal, and medial occipital cortex. The contribution of these regions reflected individual differences in reading-related abilities, such as non-word decoding or verbal comprehension. Together, the results demonstrate an optimal deep learning solution for classification using neuroimaging data. In contrast with standard mass-univariate test results, results from the deep learning model also provided evidence for regions that may be specifically affected in reading disability cases.
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.