ReviewHealth science reports2025
Recent Advancements in Neuroimaging-Based Alzheimer's Disease Prediction Using Deep Learning Approaches in e-Health: A Systematic Review.
Review in Health science reports, 2025. 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.
- PredatorNet: a clinically trustworthy deep learning framework for multi-class Alzheimer's disease classification using MRI.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2026Article
- AI-Based Classification of Mild Cognitive Impairment and Cognitively Normal Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a severe neurological disease that significantly impairs brain function. Timely identification of AD is essential for appropriate treatment and care. This comprehensive review intends to examine current developments in deep learning (DL) approaches with neuroimaging for AD diagnosis, where popular imaging types, reviews well-known online accessible data sets, and describes different algorithms used in DL for the correct initial evaluation of AD are presented. Significance: Conventional diagnostic techniques, including medical evaluations and cognitive assessments, usually not identify the initial stages of Alzheimer's. Neuroimaging methods, when integrated with DL techniques, have demonstrated considerable potential in enhancing the diagnosis and categorization of AD. DL models have received significant interest due to their capability to identify AD in its early phases automatically, which reduces the mortality rate and treatment cost of AD. Method: An extensive literature search was performed in leading scientific databases, concentrating on papers published from 2021 to 2025. Research leveraging DL models on different neuroimaging techniques such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), positron emission tomography, and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), and so forth. The review complies with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Results: Current developments show that CNN-based techniques, especially those utilizing hybrid and transfer learning frameworks, outperform conventional DL methods. Research employing the combination of multimodal neuroimaging data has demonstrated enhanced diagnostic precision. Still, challenges such as method interpretability, data heterogeneity, and limited data exist as significant issues. Conclusion: DL has considerably improved the accuracy and reliability of AD diagnosis with neuroimaging. Regardless of issues with data accessibility and adaptability, current studies into the interpretability of models and multimodal fusion provide potential for clinical application. Further research should concentrate on standardized data sets, rigorous validation architectures, and understandable AI methodologies to enhance the effectiveness of DL methods in AD prediction.
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.