Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41323574›Full record

ReviewBME frontiers2025

Scoping the Landscape of Deep Learning for Alzheimer's Disease Stage Classification: Methods, Challenges, and Opportunities.

Salleh Sonko, Mohamed Islam Houssam, Kossi Dodzi Bissadu, Brian O'Connor, Gahangir Hossain

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BME frontiers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

5 authors.

Salleh SonkoDepartment of Information Science, University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-1255-8204
Mohamed Islam HoussamDepartment of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Islamic University of Technology, Gazipur-Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Kossi Dodzi BissaduDepartment of Information Science, University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA.
Brian O'ConnorDepartment of Information Science, University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA.
Gahangir HossainDepartment of Data Science, University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deep learning (DL) models have been widely applied for Alzheimer's disease (AD) stage classification. This scoping review synthesizes recent research to evaluate current performance benchmarks, identify methodological limitations, and highlight translational barriers. DL has potential to augment diagnostic accuracy and accelerate early intervention in AD, but translation requires models that generalize across datasets and integrate into real-world clinical workflows. Following scoping review methodology, 18 peer-reviewed studies published between 2018 and 2024 were analyzed. We extracted dataset sources, preprocessing strategies, model architectures, performance metrics, and translational considerations. Most studies employed convolutional neural networks (CNNs) or transfer learning (TL) backbones with accuracies frequently reported above 90%. Comparative synthesis revealed that TL and custom CNNs achieved similar headline accuracies, with differences of less than one percentage point. Reported performance was highly sensitive to task framing (cross-sectional vs. progression) and dataset provenance, with curated subsets often yielding near-ceiling internal accuracies but limited generalizability. Only one study implemented true external validation, underscoring a critical translational gap. Cost-effectiveness was rarely discussed explicitly; however, several studies indicated that open datasets reduce financial barriers, while adapting pipelines for EMR, or multisite data entails substantial resource demands. DL for AD classification shows consistent high accuracy but limited robustness, with external validation and financial cost-effectiveness remaining underreported. Future progress depends on standardized evaluation protocols, explicit reporting of financial costs, and the development of clinically interpretable, workflow-integrated models.

Identifiers

PMID41323574
PMCPMC12657713

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.