Cited by 39Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare

Visual deep learning of unprocessed neuroimaging characterises dementia subtypes and generalises across non-stereotypic samples

Open access
Moguilner, Sebastian, Whelan, Robert, Adams, Hieab, Valcour, Victor, Tagliazucchi, Enzo, Ibáñez, Agustín·2023·eBioMedicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Dementia's diagnostic protocols are mostly based on standardised neuroimaging data collected in the Global North from homogeneous samples. In other non-stereotypical samples (participants with diverse admixture, genetics, demographics, MRI signals, or cultural origins), classifications of disease are difficult due to demographic and region-specific sample heterogeneities, lower quality scanners, and non-harmonised pipelines. METHODS: We implemented a fully automatic computer-vision classifier using deep learning neural networks. A DenseNet was applied on raw (unpreprocessed) data from 3000 participants (behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia-bvFTD, Alzheimer's disease-AD, and healthy controls; both male and female as self-reported by participants). We tested our results in demographically matched and unmatched samples to discard possible biases and performed multiple out-of-sample validations. FINDINGS: Robust classification results across all groups were achieved from standardised 3T neuroimaging data from the Global North, which also generalised to standardised 3T neuroimaging data from Latin America. Moreover, DenseNet also generalised to non-standardised, routine 1.5T clinical images from Latin America. These generalisations were robust in samples with heterogenous MRI recordings and were not confounded by demographics (i.e., were robust in both matched and unmatched samples, and when incorporating demographic variables in a multifeatured model). Model interpretability analysis using occlusion sensitivity evidenced core pathophysiological regions for each disease (mainly the hippocampus in AD, and the insula in bvFTD) demonstrating biological specificity and plausibility. INTERPRETATION: The generalisable approach outlined here could be used in the future to aid clinician decision-making in diverse samples. FUNDING: The specific funding of this article is provided in the acknowledgements section.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ebiom.2023.104540

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • A few studies have attempted to discern neuroimaging signatures unique to AD by contrasting them with other dementia types.

    “A few studies have attempted to discern neuroimaging signatures unique to AD by contrasting them with other dementia types31–40.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Moguilner, S., Whelan, R., Adams, H., Valcour, V., Tagliazucchi, E., & Ibáñez, A.
Affiliations
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Adolfo Ibáñez University (CL)
  • Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (AR)
Corresponding author
Ibáñez, Agustín
Venue
eBioMedicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-04
Volume
90
Pages
104540
ISSN
2352-3964 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4360966363
Cited by
39
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 4
FWCI
7.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • EBioMedicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
  • National Institutes of Health (R01AG057234, SG-20-725707-ReDLat)
  • Fondo para la Investigación Científica y Tecnológica (2017-1818, 2017-1820)
  • National Institute on Aging
  • Fondo de Fomento al Desarrollo Científico y Tecnológico (ANID / PIA / ANILLOS ACT210096, ID20I10152, ID22I10029)
  • Alzheimer's Association
  • Fondo de Financiamiento de Centros de Investigación en Áreas Prioritarias
  • Alzheimer's Society (GBHI ALZ UK-21-721776)
  • ANID
  • Fondo Nacional de Desarrollo Científico y Tecnológico (1210195)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Keywords
dementia subtypes, behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia, Alzheimer's disease, DenseNet, sample heterogeneity, demographic bias, occlusion sensitivity, model interpretability, hippocampus, insula, Latin America, Global North
MeSH terms
Deep Learning, Alzheimer Disease, Brain, Female, Hippocampus, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Frontotemporal Dementia, Neuroimaging

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