ArticleResearch square2024
Using Deep Learning Neural Networks to Improve Dementia Detection: Automating Coding of the Clock-Drawing Test.
Article in Research square, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Alamandine/MrgprD as a Key Player in Antiresorptive Effects in an Osteoporosis Experimental Model.Calcified tissue international · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) is a growing public health concern. The clock-drawing test (CDT), where subjects draw a clock, typically with hands showing 11:10, has been widely used for ADRD-screening. A limitation of including CDT in large-scale studies is that the CDT requires manual coding, which could result in biases if coders interpret and implement coding rules differently. This study created and evaluated an intelligent CDT Clock Scoring system built with Deep Learning Neural Networks (DLNN) to automatically code CDT images. We used a large, publicly available repository of CDT images from the 2011-2019 National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS) and compared three advanced DLNN methods - ResNet101, EfficientNet and Vision Transformers (ViT) in coding CDT into binary and ordinal (0 to 5) scores. We extended beyond the traditional nominal classification approach (which does not recognize order) by introducing structured ordering into the coding system and compared DLNN-coded CDT images with manual coding. Results suggest that ViT outperforms ResNet101 and EfficientNet, as well as manual coding. The ordinal coding system has the ability to allow researchers to minimize either under- or over-estimation errors. Starting in 2022, our developed ViT-coding system has been used in NHATS' annual CDT-coding.
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.