ArticleBMJ health & care informatics2026
Alzheimer's disease risk prediction from clinical and social determinants of health: a machine learning cohort study in UK Biobank.
Article in BMJ health & care informatics, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesSocial determinants of health (SDOH) may improve Alzheimer's disease (AD) risk prediction by capturing upstream contextual risk beyond routinely measured clinical variables. We aimed to develop and validate an accurate, interpretable machine-learning pipeline for AD risk prediction in UK Biobank using routinely collected data.
methodsUsing data from 13 076 participants in the UK Biobank, we developed an automated machine-learning pipeline for AD risk prediction with feature selection and a C5.0 boosted-tree classifier. Data were split into training, development and test sets (7:2:1); missing values were imputed in the training data only, and feature selection, tuning and threshold calibration were performed using the training/development data, with final evaluation on the independent test set. Internal validation used repeated subsampling without replacement.
resultsDuring up to 16 years of follow-up, 927 participants developed AD. Feature selection reduced 3590 variables to 26 predictors spanning age, APOE4, SDOH, medical history and routine clinical measures. The final model showed good discrimination (area under the precision-recall curve 0.89) and adequate calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow p=0.71), with stable performance under repeated subsampling. Sex-stratified models showed similar patterns. DISCUSSION: SDOH contributed useful predictive information, but their associations should be interpreted as predictive rather than causal and may reflect socioeconomic confounding and healthcare access.
conclusionsThis model could support scalable AD risk screening using routinely collected data, but external validation and recalibration in non-UK populations are needed before broader application.
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.