Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42111079›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neurology

Glial biomarkers improve classification of cognitive impairment: an explainable artificial intelligence study using CSF biomarkers.

Merve Türkegün Şengül, Dilara Nemutlu Samur

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neurology. 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

2 authors.

Merve Türkegün ŞengülDepartment of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, Faculty of Medicine, Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University, Antalya, Türkiye.
Dilara Nemutlu Samur *Department of Medical Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine, Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University, Antalya, Türkiye.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Alzheimer's disease (AD) is increasingly recognized as a disorder involving not only amyloid and tau pathology but also glial activation and neuroinflammation. Biomarkers reflecting these processes may improve the classification of clinical cognitive impairment. This study evaluated the diagnostic value of glial biomarkers, alongside cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers, for distinguishing cognitively normal individuals from those with clinical dementia rating scale (CDR)-defined very mild or mild dementia. Methods: Data from 333 adults aged ≥60 years were obtained from the Knight Alzheimer's Disease Research Center's longitudinal, open-access dataset. Seven multimodal models integrating CSF biomarkers, glial biomarkers, and clinical features were developed using machine-learning approaches. A hybrid model incorporating feature selection was applied, and model interpretability was assessed. Classification performance was evaluated using AUC, accuracy, recall, precision, and F1-score. Results: Incorporating all biomarkers, the model achieved the highest performance (AUC = 0.959; accuracy = 0.912), followed by a parsimonious hybrid model (clustering, cystatin C, age, tau, Aβ42, sex) with comparable performance (AUC = 0.951; accuracy = 0.868; Conclusion: Glial biomarkers significantly enhance diagnostic classification of CDR-defined clinical cognitive impairment beyond core CSF biomarkers. Parsimonious and interpretable machine-learning models achieve performance comparable to more complex approaches, supporting their potential use in clinical stratification frameworks.

Indexed as

Alzheimer’s diseasecognitive impairmentexplainable artificial intelligenceglial biomarkersmachine learningneuroinflammation

Identifiers

PMID42111079
PMCPMC13149148

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.