ArticleScientific reports2025
Impact of canny edge detection preprocessing on performance of machine learning models for Parkinson's disease classification.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- A Deep Learning Framework for Early Parkinson's Disease Detection: Leveraging Spiral and Wave Handwriting Tasks with EfficientNetV2-S.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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigates the classification of individuals as healthy or at risk of Parkinson's disease using machine learning (ML) models, focusing on the impact of dataset size and preprocessing techniques on model performance. Four datasets are created from an original dataset: [Formula: see text] (normal dataset), [Formula: see text] ([Formula: see text] subjected to Canny edge detection and Hessian filtering), [Formula: see text] (augmented [Formula: see text]), and [Formula: see text] (augmented [Formula: see text]). We evaluate a range of ML models-Logistic Regression (LR), Decision Tree (DT), Random Forest (RF), Gradient Boosting (GB), XGBoost (XBG), Naive Bayes (NB), Support Vector Machine (SVM), and AdaBoost (AdB)-on these datasets, analyzing prediction accuracy, model size, and prediction latency. The results show that while larger datasets lead to increased model memory footprints and prediction latencies, the Canny edge detection preprocessing supplemented by Hessian filtering (used in [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text]) degrades the performance of most models. In our experiment, we observe that Random Forest (RF) maintains a stable memory footprint of 61 KB across all datasets, while models like KNN and SVM show significant increases in memory usage, from 5.7-7 KB on [Formula: see text] to 102-220 KB on [Formula: see text], and similar increases in prediction time. Logistic Regression, Decision Tree, and Naive Bayes show stable memory footprints and fast prediction times across all datasets. XGBoost's prediction time increases from 180-200 ms on [Formula: see text] to 700-3000 ms on [Formula: see text]. Statistical analysis using the Mann-Whitney U test with 100 prediction accuracy observations per model (98 degrees of freedom) reveals significant differences in performance between models trained on [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] (p-values < 1e-34 for most models), while the effect sizes measured by estimating Cliff's delta values (approaching [Formula: see text]) indicate large shifts in performance, especially for SVM and XGBoost. These findings highlight the importance of selecting lightweight models like LR and DT for deployment in resource-constrained healthcare applications, as models like KNN, SVM, and XGBoost show significant increases in resource demands with larger datasets, particularly when Canny preprocessing is applied.
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.