ArticleScientific reports2025
Application of machine learning and temporal response function modeling of EEG data for differential diagnosis in primary progressive aphasia.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is a neurodegenerative syndrome characterized by progressive decline in speech and/or language. There are three PPA subtypes with distinct speech-language profiles. Early diagnosis is essential for optimal provision of care but differential diagnosis by PPA subtype can be difficult and time consuming. We investigated the diagnostic utility of a novel electroencephalography (EEG)-based biomarker in conjunction with machine learning. Individuals with semantic, logopenic, or nonfluent/agrammatic variant PPA and healthy controls (n = 10 per group) listened to a continuous narrative while EEG responses were recorded. The speech envelope and linguistic features representing core language processes were extracted from the narrative speech and temporal response function (TRF) modeling was used to estimate the neural responses to these features. Although TRF modeling has shown promise for clinical applications, research is lacking regarding its diagnostic utility in populations like PPA. This study sought to provide preliminary evidence to address this gap. The resulting TRFs for channel Cz were used as input to machine learning algorithms for classification of PPA vs. healthy controls, three-way classification by PPA subtype, classification of a single PPA subtype relative to the other two (e.g., semantic vs. logopenic/nonfluent variant), and pairwise classification by PPA subtype. F1 scores were highest for the latter tasks (F1's from 0.73 to 0.74), with better-than-chance classification in all tasks. Additional analyses determined that the TRF beta weights significantly improved classification over preprocessed EEG waveforms alone for all but one task (PPA vs. healthy controls). Our preliminary findings demonstrate the potential utility of this approach for differential diagnosis of PPA, warranting further investigation.
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.