Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41150707›Full record

ArticlePLoS biology2025

Brain-age models with lower age prediction accuracy have higher sensitivity for disease detection.

Marc-Andre Schulz, Nys Tjade Siegel, Kerstin Ritter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Alzheimer's Disease Brain Phenotypes are Age-dependent.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Shared genetic architecture of brain age gap across 30 cohorts worldwide.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Marc-Andre SchulzDepartment of Psychiatry and Neurosciences, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin (corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health), Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1140-1841
Nys Tjade SiegelDepartment of Psychiatry and Neurosciences, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin (corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health), Berlin, Germany.
Kerstin RitterDepartment of Psychiatry and Neurosciences, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin (corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health), Berlin, Germany.

Funding

Brain & Behavior Research Foundation (NARSAD)Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG)Manfred and Ursula-Müller Stiftung
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study critically reevaluates the utility of brain-age models within the context of detecting neurological and psychiatric disorders, challenging the conventional emphasis on maximizing chronological age prediction accuracy. Our analysis of T1 MRI data from 46,381 UK Biobank participants reveals that simpler machine learning models, and notably those with excessive regularization, demonstrate superior sensitivity to disease-relevant changes compared to their more complex counterparts, despite being less accurate in chronological age prediction. This counterintuitive discovery suggests that models traditionally deemed inferior might, in fact, offer a more meaningful biomarker for brain health by capturing variations pertinent to disease states. These findings challenge the assumption that accuracy-optimized brain-age models serve as useful normative models of brain aging. Optimizing for age accuracy appears misaligned with normative aims: it drives models to rely on low-variance aging features and to deemphasize higher-variance signals that are more informative about brain health and disease. Consequently, we propose a recalibration of focus towards models that, while less accurate in conventional terms, yield brain-age gaps with larger patient-control effect sizes, offering greater utility in early disease detection and understanding the multifaceted nature of brain aging.

Indexed as

AgingBrainAdultAgedFemaleHumansMachine LearningMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID41150707
PMCPMC12633945

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.