ArticleArXiv2026
Imputation-free transformer learning enables robust Alzheimer's disease prediction and calibrated uncertainty quantification across heterogeneous clinical cohorts.
Article in ArXiv, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Accurate diagnostic classification and disease-severity prediction for Alzheimer's disease are hampered by the pervasive incompleteness and heterogeneity of real-world clinical data. Left unaddressed, these barriers prevent reliable disease modelling and hinder effective clinical evaluation. Conventional imputation strategies introduce systematic bias, distort inter-feature relationships, and yield overconfident predictions, limitations that are especially consequential in diagnostic settings. Here, we propose NITROGEN, an imputation-free transformer that jointly models within-patient feature dependencies and between-patient relational structure through masked and intersample attention, enabling robust multimodal learning directly from partially observed records. We trained NITROGEN on the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI; N=7858 scans), and evaluated it, without further retraining, on two independent cohorts: the Open Access Series of Imaging Studies (OASIS-3; N=2675 scans) and the Australian Imaging, Biomarkers and Lifestyle (AIBL; N=1286 scans) study. Across all cohorts and various tasks including binary and multi-class diagnostic classification as well as continuous cognitive score prediction, NITROGEN showed robust probability calibration and uncertainty quantification advantages over tree-based ensemble methods, while maintaining competitive discriminative and continuous cognitive score prediction performance. Moreover, cross-cohort and cross-method analyses identified cortical thickness in the temporal pole, age, and APOE genotype as important, though not individually sufficient, features for robust AD status classification. To address prediction reliability under incomplete data, we further introduced a modality-aware uncertainty adjustment that augments predictive uncertainty in proportion to the estimated importance of absent modalities, enabling models to express calibrated confidence when critical diagnostic information is unavailable. Taken together, our results show that imputation-free attention learning preserved meaningful discrimination under external cohort shift, while revealing the expected performance degradation on more distributionally different cohorts. These findings further demonstrate that evaluating machine learning models for neurological disease along dimensions of calibration, interpretability, and cross-cohort reliability-not predictive accuracy alone-is essential for better clinical deployment. Code to reproduce our experiments is publicly available at https://github.com/cschneuw/nitrogen.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42523517PMC13405417What 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.