ArticleFrontiers in aging neuroscience2025
Interpretable machine learning for cognitive impairment prediction in Parkinson's disease: a multicenter validation study with SHAP analysis.
Article in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Parkinson's disease (PD)-related cognitive impairment (PD-CI) is a common and impactful complication of PD, yet current predictive models often rely on specialized resources, lack interpretability, or have limited cross-population validation. This study aimed to develop an interpretable machine learning framework for PD-CI detection using only routine clinical data, addressing unmet needs in accessible and generalizable PD care. Methods: We analyzed 1,279 participants from the Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI) as the discovery cohort and 197 patients from an independent validation cohort. PD-CI was defined by a Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score ≤26 and Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Part I (UPDRS-I) score ≥1. Twenty-one clinical features-encompassing hematological parameters, metabolic markers, and demographics-were preprocessed with synthetic minority over-sampling. Four machine learning models were trained and optimized via nested 5-fold cross-validation. Results: The Random Forest algorithm achieved superior performance in the discovery cohort (AUC = 0.83), outperforming CatBoost (AUC = 0.82), XGBoost (AUC = 0.79), and neural networks (AUC = 0.66). External validation of the framework preserved 71.57% accuracy. SHAP interpretability analysis identified age, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and serum uric acid as critical predictors, revealing synergistic risk effects between elevated inflammation markers and reduced antioxidant levels. Discussion: This framework demonstrates diagnostic accuracy comparable to advanced neuroimaging while utilizing readily available clinical data, enhancing accessibility in resource-limited settings. It highlights neuroinflammation and oxidative stress as key mechanistic drivers of PD-CI, advancing pathophysiological understanding. Multicenter validation confirms the model's robustness across ethnic populations, supporting its utility as a clinically actionable tool for PD-CI screening and monitoring.
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.