ReviewPeerJ. Computer science2026
Systematic review of unveiling the potential of AI using machine learning and deep learning methods in neurodegenerative diseases.
Review in PeerJ. Computer science, 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
Background: Neurodegenerative diseases (NDDs) are becoming a major worldwide issue, especially for the elderly because they are incurable and permanent. It is extremely difficult to provide any medication to people suffering from NDDs. Comprehending essential processes of NDDs are essential to establishing alternative strategies that can increase survival rates in patients. This review is an effort to provide insight into NDDs, innovative therapeutic methods along with their clinical significances and thus provide opportunities for improving therapies for NDDs in the near future. Objective: This work aims at a thorough, methodical and critical evaluation of Machine Learning (ML)/Deep Learning (DL) efforts in diagnostics of NDDs, as well as their potential for use in pharmacological, clinical and research settings. An additional objective is to discuss problems and limitations of models, with an eye on furthering research directions. Methods: The databases of Elsevier, Sage, Wiley, Springer Link, Emerald Insights and Research Gate were searched for useful assessments of NDDs using ML/DL approaches. Results: Numerous potential diagnostic ML/DL models have been suggested and effectively applied to detect NDDs. Biological, neuroimaging and key clinical characteristics in patients have been used to evaluate prognostic models. Additionally, these models provide options for patient categorization, facilitate earlier detections, enhanced diagnosis and better disease outcome predictions for personalized therapies. Conclusion: This work points out the rising burden of NDDs on the global elderly while highlighting the significances of ML/DL technological advancements with their limitations for NDDs in diagnostics, identification of effective disease bio-markers and management.
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.