Cited by 116Parkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare

Enhancing early Parkinson’s disease detection through multimodal deep learning and explainable AI: insights from the PPMI database

Open access
Dentamaro, Vincenzo, Impedovo, Donato, Musti, Luca, Pirlo, Giuseppe, Taurisano, Paolo·2024·Scientific Reports

Abstract

Parkinson's is the second most common neurodegenerative disease, affecting nearly 8.5M people and steadily increasing. In this research, Multimodal Deep Learning is investigated for the Prodromal stage detection of Parkinson's Disease (PD), combining different 3D architectures with the novel Excitation Network (EN) and supported by Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) techniques. Utilizing data from the Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative, this study introduces a joint co-learning approach for multimodal fusion, enabling end-to-end training of deep neural networks and facilitating the learning of complementary information from both imaging and clinical modalities. DenseNet with EN outperformed other models, showing a substantial increase in accuracy when supplemented with clinical data. XAI methods, such as Integrated Gradients for ResNet and DenseNet, and Attention Heatmaps for Vision Transformer (ViT), revealed that DenseNet focused on brain regions believed to be critical to prodromal pathophysiology, including the right temporal and left pre-frontal areas. Similarly, ViT highlighted the lateral ventricles associated with cognitive decline, indicating their potential in the Prodromal stage. These findings underscore the potential of these regions as early-stage PD biomarkers and showcase the proposed framework's efficacy in predicting subtypes of PD and aiding in early diagnosis, paving the way for innovative diagnostic tools and precision medicine.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41598-024-70165-4

Cites

82 of 82 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Dentamaro et al. (2024) achieved >90% accuracy for prodromal PD detection using a 3D-CNN architecture that synthesizes structural MRI data, cardinal motor symptoms, and genetic risk markers.

    “Dentamaro et al. (2024) achieved >90% accuracy for prodromal PD detection using a 3D-CNN architecture that synthesizes structural MRI data, cardinal motor symptoms (tremor/rigidity/bradykinesia/postural instability), and genetic risk markers”

    From Multimodal neuroimaging and AI integration in cognitive disorders: advances, challenges, and future directions for precision medicine (2026) · cites this paper as Dentamaro et al., 2024

    Results (Models evaluation, Table 1; page unavailable) report 96.6% accuracy for DenseNet + EN in classifying prodromal PD versus healthy controls using MRI and clinical data. Methods (Clinical dataset, Table 3; page unavailable) list the four cardinal motor symptoms and family history among the inputs, but no genetic markers. The Discussion says integrating genetic data is future work, so the claim incorrectly describes family-history features as genetic risk markers. (LLM, conf=0.91)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [78]Sundararajan, M., Taly, A. & Yan, Q. Axiomatic attribution for deep networks. In 34th International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML 2017 Vol. 7, 5109–5118 (2017).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dentamaro, V., Impedovo, D., Musti, L., Pirlo, G., & Taurisano, P.
Affiliations
University of Bari Aldo Moro (IT)
Corresponding author
Dentamaro, Vincenzo
Venue
Scientific Reports
Published
2024-09-09
Volume
14
Issue
1
Pages
20941-20941
ISSN
2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4402377819
Cited by
116
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 68 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 3
FWCI
31.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • CINECA IRIS Institutional Research Information System (University of Bari Aldo Moro) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
DARE - DigitAl lifelong pRevEntion (B53C22006420001)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Parkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Keywords
Parkinson's disease, multimodal fusion, multimodal deep learning, explainable AI, DenseNet, vision transformer, integrated gradients, attention heatmaps, Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative, neuroimaging, clinical data, biomarkers, cognitive decline, lateral ventricle, temporal lobe, prefrontal cortex
MeSH terms
Deep Learning, Aged, Artificial Intelligence, Brain, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Parkinson Disease, Databases, Factual, Neural Networks, Computer, Early Diagnosis

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