ArticleFrontiers in neurology2026
An interpretable multimodal ensemble assessment framework for Alzheimer's disease cognitive staging.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objectives: Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most prevalent type of neuro-degenerative dementia. Artificial intelligence assisted clinical evaluation can improve diagnostic efficiency and facilitate timely intervention. Methods: An interpretable Multimodal Ensemble Assessment Framework (MEAF) was developed to support clinical evaluation for AD across the cognitive spectrum. This framework employed a Swin Transformer and ResNet-50 for staged modeling of imaging features, applied machine learning techniques to extract clinical features, and used decision-level ensemble learning to integrate multimodal predictions. For interpretability analysis, Gradient-weighted Class Activation Maps were used to highlight key brain regions contributing to imaging-based decisions, and Shapley Additive exPlanations were applied to quantitatively assess the importance of clinical features. Results: MEAF achieved robust performance in classifying cognitively normal, mild cognitive impairment, and AD, with an accuracy of 0.878 and an F1-score of 0.877. In the independent external validation cohort, MEAF maintained reasonable performance, with an accuracy of 0.817 and an F1-score of 0.803. Interpretability analyses provided complementary explanations for both the imaging and clinical models. Conclusion: MEAF demonstrated favorable classification performance and interpretability in retrospective multicenter datasets, suggesting its potential as an auxiliary framework for multimodal assessment of AD-related cognitive staging.
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.