skip to main content
Language:
Search Limited to: Search Limited to: Resource type Show Results with: Show Results with: Search type Index

Machine learning of neuroimaging for assisted diagnosis of cognitive impairment and dementia: A systematic review

Alzheimer's & dementia : diagnosis, assessment & disease monitoring, 2018, Vol.10 (1), p.519-535 [Peer Reviewed Journal]

2018 The Authors ;2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of the Alzheimer's Association. ;2018 The Authors 2018 ;ISSN: 2352-8729 ;EISSN: 2352-8729 ;DOI: 10.1016/j.dadm.2018.07.004 ;PMID: 30364671

Full text available

Citations Cited by
  • Title:
    Machine learning of neuroimaging for assisted diagnosis of cognitive impairment and dementia: A systematic review
  • Author: Pellegrini, Enrico ; Ballerini, Lucia ; Hernandez, Maria del C. Valdes ; Chappell, Francesca M. ; González-Castro, Victor ; Anblagan, Devasuda ; Danso, Samuel ; Muñoz-Maniega, Susana ; Job, Dominic ; Pernet, Cyril ; Mair, Grant ; MacGillivray, Tom J. ; Trucco, Emanuele ; Wardlaw, Joanna M.
  • Subjects: Cerebrovascular disease ; Classification ; Dementia ; Machine learning ; MRI ; Neuroimaging ; Pathological aging ; Segmentation ; Small vessel disease
  • Is Part Of: Alzheimer's & dementia : diagnosis, assessment & disease monitoring, 2018, Vol.10 (1), p.519-535
  • Description: Advanced machine learning methods might help to identify dementia risk from neuroimaging, but their accuracy to date is unclear. We systematically reviewed the literature, 2006 to late 2016, for machine learning studies differentiating healthy aging from dementia of various types, assessing study quality, and comparing accuracy at different disease boundaries. Of 111 relevant studies, most assessed Alzheimer's disease versus healthy controls, using AD Neuroimaging Initiative data, support vector machines, and only T1-weighted sequences. Accuracy was highest for differentiating Alzheimer's disease from healthy controls and poor for differentiating healthy controls versus mild cognitive impairment versus Alzheimer's disease or mild cognitive impairment converters versus nonconverters. Accuracy increased using combined data types, but not by data source, sample size, or machine learning method. Machine learning does not differentiate clinically relevant disease categories yet. More diverse data sets, combinations of different types of data, and close clinical integration of machine learning would help to advance the field. •Systematic review of machine learning methods of neuroimaging was performed.•Machine learning to predict risk of dementia does not seem ready for clinical use.•Methods have high accuracy to differentiate Alzheimer's disease versus healthy control.•Performances were poorer when assessing more clinically relevant distinctions.
  • Publisher: United States: Elsevier Inc
  • Language: English
  • Identifier: ISSN: 2352-8729
    EISSN: 2352-8729
    DOI: 10.1016/j.dadm.2018.07.004
    PMID: 30364671
  • Source: DOAJ : Directory of Open Access Journals
    Journals@Ovid Open Access Journal Collection Rolling
    PubMed Central
    ProQuest Central
Back to results list
INSPIRE LIBRARY - TON DUC THANG UNIVERSITY (84-028) 37 755 057 Feedback
19 Nguyen Huu Tho St. Dist.7, HCM thuvien@tdtu.edu.vn

Copyright © 2017 INSPIRE LIBRARY - TON DUC THANG UNIVERSITY

Searching Remote Databases, Please Wait