ArticleBrain informatics2024
Explainable brain age prediction: a comparative evaluation of morphometric and deep learning pipelines.
Article in Brain informatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Generalizable and explainable deep learning for brain MRI: a multi-cohort evaluation of 3D architectures for age and sex prediction.Brain informatics · 2026Article
- Deep Learning-Based Structural Brain Age Estimation in Bipolar Disorder and Schizophrenia: A Single-Site Pilot Study.Human brain mapping · 2026Article
- Detecting label noise in longitudinal Alzheimer's data with explainable artificial intelligence.Brain informatics · 2025Article
- Network Occlusion Sensitivity Analysis Identifies Regional Contributions to Brain Age Prediction.Human brain mapping · 2025Article
- Knowledge map of artificial intelligence in neurodegenerative diseases: a decade-long bibliometric and visualization study.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2025Article
- Deep learning interpretability in neuroimaging: A comprehensive survey and methodological recommendations.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Brain age, a biomarker reflecting brain health relative to chronological age, is increasingly used in neuroimaging to detect early signs of neurodegenerative diseases and support personalized treatment plans. Two primary approaches for brain age prediction have emerged: morphometric feature extraction from MRI scans and deep learning (DL) applied to raw MRI data. However, a systematic comparison of these methods regarding performance, interpretability, and clinical utility has been limited. In this study, we present a comparative evaluation of two pipelines: one using morphometric features from FreeSurfer and the other employing 3D convolutional neural networks (CNNs). Using a multisite neuroimaging dataset, we assessed both model performance and the interpretability of predictions through eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) methods, applying SHAP to the feature-based pipeline and Grad-CAM and DeepSHAP to the CNN-based pipeline. Our results show comparable performance between the two pipelines in Leave-One-Site-Out (LOSO) validation, achieving state-of-the-art performance on the independent test set (
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.