ArticleScientific reports2025
Predicting mortality risk in Alzheimer's disease using machine learning based on lifestyle and physical activity.
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 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Machine learning-based methods in diagnosing cardiac amyloidosis: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Survival machine learning models for predicting all-cause and case-specific mortality risk in metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease patients.Scientific reports · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Alzheimer's disease (AD), a progressive neurodegenerative disorder, significantly impacts patient survival, prompting the need for accurate prognostic tools. Lifestyle factors and physical activity levels have been identified as critical modifiable risk factors influencing AD outcomes, but their precise impact on mortality prediction remains understudied. This study aimed to employ machine learning (ML) techniques to predict mortality risk in AD patients, leveraging data on lifestyle and physical activity to enhance personalized care strategies and inform public health policies. We analyzed data from 53,231 participants collected from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES, 2007-2020). Participants were stratified by AD symptom severity using Patient Health Questionnaire-9 scores. Random Survival Forest (RSF) and Cox proportional hazards models were developed and validated using a training set (n = 42,585) and test set (n = 10,646). Model performance was evaluated using the integrated area under the curve (iAUC), integrated Brier score/prediction error (iBS/PE), and concordance index (C-index). The RSF model outperformed the Cox model, achieving higher discrimination and calibration. Specifically, the RSF demonstrated an iAUC of 0.781 (95% CI 0.778-0.839), iBS/PE of 0.150 (95% CI 0.083-0.122), and a C-index of 0.785 (95% CI 0.776-0.800) in the no-symptom group of the training cohort. These metrics indicate superior predictive accuracy, especially at extreme ends of risk prediction. Lifestyle and physical activity levels were identified as significant predictors influencing mortality risk. ML algorithms, notably RSF, effectively predict mortality risk in AD patients, demonstrating clear advantages over traditional statistical models. Incorporating lifestyle and physical activity into ML-based predictive frameworks can significantly improve risk stratification, informing targeted interventions. Further external validation across diverse populations is necessary to establish broader applicability.
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.