ArticleScientific reports2026
Machine-learning prediction and risk stratification of 12-month cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease using routine clinical and MRI data.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
Early identification of patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) who will experience near-term cognitive decline can support trial enrichment and risk-stratified follow-up. Using the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI), we developed two prognostic models for 12-month Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) decrease (≥ 3 points): (i) a clinical logistic-regression model and (ii) a random-forest model combining clinical variables with MRI-derived volumetric measures. In 306 participants with baseline AD and complete 12-month MMSE (mean age 74.8 years; baseline MMSE 23.1), 131 (42.8%) declined. Five-fold stratified cross-validation with within-fold preprocessing and imputation was used for internal validation. The clinical model achieved an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.755, while the random-forest model achieved an AUC of 0.773 and provided higher net benefit across threshold probabilities of 0.20-0.80 in decision-curve analysis. Risk stratification using pre-specified cut-offs (< 0.25, 0.25-0.50, ≥ 0.50) yielded monotonic observed decline rates (13.2%, 35.3%, 67.2%). These findings suggest that a transparent two-model framework based on ADNI data provides moderate prognostic accuracy and clinically interpretable three-tier risk stratification; however, external validation and local recalibration are required before clinical implementation.
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.