ArticleAging clinical and experimental research2025
Neuropsychological tests and machine learning: identifying predictors of MCI and dementia progression.
Article in Aging clinical and experimental research, 2025. 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.
- Multimodal Signatures of Brain Aging: From Descriptive Analyses to Machine Learning-Based Integration.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Low Sensitivity of Neuropsychological Scales Hinder Detection of Potential Benefit of Treatments in Alzheimer's Disease: A Position Paper.European journal of neurology · 2026Review
- The ICN-UN Battery: A Machine Learning-Optimized Tool for Expeditious Alzheimer's Disease Diagnosis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEarly prediction of progression in dementia is of major importance for providing patients with adequate clinical care, with considerable impact on the organization of the whole healthcare system.
aimsThe main task is tailoring robust and consolidated machine learning models to detect which neuropsychological tests are more effective in predicting a patient's mental status. In a translational medicine perspective, such identification tool should find its place in the clinician's toolbox as a support throughout his daily diagnostic routine. A second objective involves predicting the patient's diagnosis based on the results of the cognitive assessment.
methods281 patients with MCI or dementia diagnosis were assessed through 14 commonly administered neuropsychological tests designed to evaluate different cognitive domains. A suite of machine learning models, trained on different subsets of data, was used to detect the most informative tests and to predict the patient's diagnosis. Two external validation datasets containing MMSE and FAB tests were involved in this second task.
resultsThe tests qualitatively and statistically associated to a cognitive decline are MMSE, FAB, BSTR, AM, and VSF, of which at least three were considered the most informative also by machine learning. 73% average accuracy was obtained in the diagnosis prediction on three subsets of original and external data. DISCUSSION: Detecting the most informative tests could reduce the visits' time and prevent the cognitive assessment from being biased by external factors. Machine learning models' prediction represents a useful baseline for the clinician's actual diagnosis and a reliable insight into the future development of the patient's cognitive status.
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.