ArticlePloS one2024
Random survival forest model for early prediction of Alzheimer's disease conversion in early and late Mild cognitive impairment stages.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Feature Selection Analysis and Robustness to Missing Data for Sensor-Based Prognostic Modeling of Alzheimer's Disease Progression.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- RDoC-informed explainable AI as a paradigm for multilevel Alzheimer's disease diagnosis and progression prediction: a systematic review.Brain informatics · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With a clinical trial failure rate of 99.6% for Alzheimer's Disease (AD), early diagnosis is critical. Machine learning (ML) models have shown promising results in early AD prediction, with survival ML models outperforming typical classifiers by providing probabilities of disease progression over time. This study utilized various ML survival models to predict the time-to-conversion to AD for early (eMCI) and late (lMCI) Mild Cognitive Impairment stages, considering their different progression rates. ADNI data, consisting of 291 eMCI and 546 lMCI cases, was preprocessed to handle missing values and data imbalance. The models used included Random Survival Forest (RSF), Extra Survival Trees (XST), Gradient Boosting (GB), Survival Tree (ST), Cox-net, and Cox Proportional Hazard (CoxPH). We evaluated cognitive, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers, and neuroimaging modalities, both individually and combined, to identify the most influential features. Our results indicate that RSF outperformed traditional CoxPH and other ML models. For eMCI, RSF trained on multimodal data achieved a C-Index of 0.90 and an IBS of 0.10. For lMCI, the C-Index was 0.82 and the IBS was 0.16. Cognitive tests showed a statistically significant improvement over other modalities, underscoring their reliability in early prediction. Furthermore, RSF-generated individual survival curves from baseline data facilitate clinical decision-making, aiding clinicians in developing personalized treatment plans and implementing preventive measures to slow or prevent AD progression in prodromal stages.
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.