ArticleFrontiers in aging neuroscience2026
Explainable machine learning for Alzheimer's disease characterization using small-sample EEG data.
Article in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is associated with progressive cognitive decline and altered brain functional activity, yet objective and interpretable electrophysiological indicators remain insufficiently established. Resting-state electroencephalography (EEG) offers a low-cost and clinically accessible candidate, provided that the analysis is validated at the subject level and remains interpretable. This study evaluated an interpretable resting-state EEG framework for distinguishing AD patients from healthy control (HC) subjects. A total of 63 participants (36 AD and 27 HC) from a publicly available dataset were included. Subject-level spectral and nonlinear complexity features were extracted from 19 preprocessed scalp channels; missing-value imputation, feature screening, redundancy pruning, scaling, and model fitting were carried out within each fold of leave-one-subject-out cross-validation. Four linear classifiers were compared, and Ridge Logistic regression was retained for out-of-fold SHAP interpretation because of its balanced hard-label performance and direct compatibility with Linear SHAP. Ridge Logistic regression achieved an exploratory AUC of 0.912 (accuracy = 0.857, sensitivity = 0.778, specificity = 0.963) under a non-nested validation design. Across 30 independently balanced epoch resamples, mean AUC was 0.887 ± 0.020; using all accepted epochs yielded AUC = 0.917. SHAP analysis indicated that the classifier drew jointly on posterior α activity, frontal and temporal θ power, the θ/α ratio, and slow/fast ratio features. A classifier-independent microstate analysis revealed reduced putative Class B occurrence, increased putative Class C and Class D duration, and six FDR-corrected off-diagonal transition differences in AD; the three temporal effects persisted across repeated
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.