Boosting diagnosis accuracy of Alzheimer's disease using high dimensional recognition of longitudinal brain atrophy patterns
Abstract
Objective Boosting accuracy in automatically discriminating patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and normal controls (NC), based on multidimensional classification of longitudinal whole brain atrophy rates and their intermediate counterparts in analyzing magnetic resonance images (MRI).Method Longitudinal percentage of brain volume changes (PBVC) in two-year follow up and its intermediate counterparts in early 6-month and late 18-month are used as features in supervised and unsupervised classification procedures based on K-mean, fuzzy clustering method (FCM) and support vector machine (SVM). The most relevant features for classification are selected using discriminative analysis (DA) of features and their principal components (PC). Accuracy of the proposed method is evaluated in a group of 30 patients with AD (16 males, 14 females, age±standard-deviation (SD)=75±1.36 years) and 30 normal controls (15 males, 15 females, age±SD=77±0.88 years) using leave-one-out cross-validation.Results Results indicate superiority of supervised machine learning techniques over unsupervised ones in diagnosing AD and withal, predominance of RBF kernel over lineal one. Accuracies of 83.3%, 83.3%, 90% and 91.7% are achieved in classification by K-mean, FCM, linear SVM and SVM with radial based function (RBF) respectively.Conclusion Evidence that SVM classification of longitudinal atrophy rates may results in high accuracy is given. Additionally, it is realized that use of intermediate atrophy rates and their principal components improves diagnostic accuracy.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Longitudinal-data classifiers outperform cross-sectional-data classifiers in classification performance.
“Informed by pattern classification studies which have demonstrated that pattern classifiers built on longitudinal data could achieve better classification performance than those built on cross-sectional data”
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 56 · Cited by 46
- Authors
- Farzan, A., Mashohor, S., Ramli, A. R., & Mahmud, R.
- Affiliations
- Universiti Putra Malaysia (MY)
- Corresponding author
- Farzan, Ali
- Venue
- Behavioural Brain Research
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-09
- Volume
- 290
- Pages
- 124-130
- ISSN
- 0166-4328 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2011083232
- Cited by
- 46
- References
- 56
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 4
- FWCI
- 6.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Behavioural Brain Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Universiti Putra Malaysia Institutional Repository (Universiti Putra Malaysia) (acceptedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
- Keywords
- Alzheimer's disease, brain atrophy, longitudinal brain volume change, MRI diagnosis, support vector machine, fuzzy clustering, K-means clustering, feature selection, principal component analysis, discriminant analysis, Gaussian kernel
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Alzheimer Disease, Atrophy, Brain, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Cluster Analysis, Principal Component Analysis, Support Vector Machine
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review