ArticleScientific reports2025
Advanced MRI based Alzheimer's diagnosis through ensemble learning techniques.
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.
- Advances in AI-based diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease using MRI: a comprehensive survey.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
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
Alzheimer's Disease is a condition that affects the brain and causes changes in behavior and memory loss while making it hard to carry out tasks properly. It's vital to spot the illness early, for effective treatment. MRI technology has advanced in detecting Alzheimer's by using machine learning and deep learning models. These models use neural networks to analyze brain MRI results automatically and identify key indicators of Alzheimer's disease. In this study, we used MRI data to train a CNN for diagnosing and categorizing the four stages of Alzheimer's disease with deep learning techniques, offering significant advantages in identifying patterns in medical imaging for this neurodegenerative condition compared to using a CNN exclusively trained for this purpose. They evaluated ResNet50, InceptionResNetv2 as well as a CNN specifically trained for their study and found that combining the models led to highly accurate results. The accuracy rates for the trained CNN model stood at 90.76%, InceptionResNetv2 at 86.84%, and ResNet50 at 90.27%. In this trial run of the experiment conducted by combining all three models collaboratively resulted in an accuracy rate of 94.27% compared to the accuracy rates of each model working individually.
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.