Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41483227›Full record

ArticleNeurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology2026

The value of machine learning models in differentiating alzheimer's disease from Moderate-to-Severe cerebral small vessel disease.

Xin Zheng, Chunlan Dai, Qiu Tang, Tingyong Lu, Yunliang Xiang, Mao Yang, Ming Wen

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Xin ZhengDepartment of Radiology, Chongqing Tongnan Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, 402660, Chongqing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1192-3164
Chunlan DaiDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Chongqing Tongnan Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chongqing, 402660, China.
Qiu TangDepartment of Radiology, Chongqing Tongnan Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, 402660, Chongqing, China.
Tingyong LuDepartment of Radiology, Chongqing Tongnan Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, 402660, Chongqing, China.
Yunliang XiangDepartment of Radiology, Chongqing Qijiang district hospital of traditional chinese medicine, Chongqing, 401420, China.
Mao YangDepartment of Radiology, Chongqing Tongnan Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, 402660, Chongqing, China.
Ming WenDepartment of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, 400016, China. 13883669699@163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5284-5820

Funding

the Science and Technology Committee of Tongnan District in Chongqing TK-2024-13
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo establish machine learning models to differentiate Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) from moderate-to-severe cerebral small vessel disease (CSVD) by comparing their imaging features.

methodsImaging data were retrospectively obtained from 50 patients diagnosed with AD and 98 patients presenting moderate-to-severe CSVD. Apparent diffusion coefficients (ADC) within various brain regions, as well as anatomical structural volumes, were quantified using an MRI-based brain segmentation approach. Comparative analyses of imaging characteristics between AD and CSVD patient groups were performed. Subsequently, binary logistic regression analysis was employed to identify significant imaging markers. Predictive models, including logistic regression (Logit), support vector machine (SVM), gradient boosting machine (GBM), and decision tree (DT) classifiers, were established and compared for their ability to distinguish AD from CSVD.

resultsThe logistic regression model differentiated AD with a sensitivity of 76.53%, specificity of 79.00%, and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.778. In comparison, the decision tree model yielded a sensitivity of 80.73%, specificity of 88.76%, and an AUC of 0.844. The SVM model produced a sensitivity of 78.57%, specificity of 83.00%, and an AUC of 0.808. Finally, the GBM model exhibited a sensitivity of 84.69%, specificity of 87.00%, and an AUC of 0.859.

conclusionThe gradient boosting machine model demonstrated the best diagnostic performance for identifying AD (AUC = 0.864), is suitable for clinical screening due to its high sensitivity and specificity.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseCerebral Small Vessel DiseasesMachine LearningAgedAged, 80 and overBoosting Machine Learning AlgorithmsBrainClassification AlgorithmsDecision TreesDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsMagnetic Resonance ImagingMalePredictive Learning ModelsAI-based brain segmentationAlzheimer’s diseaseApparent diffusion coefficientCerebral small vessel diseaseMachine learning

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.