Cited by 472Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare

Development and validation of an interpretable deep learning framework for Alzheimer’s disease classification

Open access
Qiu, Shangran, Joshi, Prajakta S, Miller, Matthew I, Xue, Chonghua, Zhou, Xiao, Karjadi, Cody, Chang, Gary H, Joshi, Anant S +13 more·2020·Brain

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Alzheimer's disease is the primary cause of dementia worldwide, with an increasing morbidity burden that may outstrip diagnosis and management capacity as the population ages. Current methods integrate patient history, neuropsychological testing and MRI to identify likely cases, yet effective practices remain variably applied and lacking in sensitivity and specificity. Here we report an interpretable deep learning strategy that delineates unique Alzheimer's disease signatures from multimodal inputs of MRI, age, gender, and Mini-Mental State Examination score. Our framework linked a fully convolutional network, which constructs high resolution maps of disease probability from local brain structure to a multilayer perceptron and generates precise, intuitive visualization of individual Alzheimer's disease risk en route to accurate diagnosis. The model was trained using clinically diagnosed Alzheimer's disease and cognitively normal subjects from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) dataset (n = 417) and validated on three independent cohorts: the Australian Imaging, Biomarker and Lifestyle Flagship Study of Ageing (AIBL) (n = 382), the Framingham Heart Study (n = 102), and the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC) (n = 582). Performance of the model that used the multimodal inputs was consistent across datasets, with mean area under curve values of 0.996, 0.974, 0.876 and 0.954 for the ADNI study, AIBL, Framingham Heart Study and NACC datasets, respectively. Moreover, our approach exceeded the diagnostic performance of a multi-institutional team of practicing neurologists (n = 11), and high-risk cerebral regions predicted by the model closely tracked post-mortem histopathological findings. This framework provides a clinically adaptable strategy for using routinely available imaging techniques such as MRI to generate nuanced neuroimaging signatures for Alzheimer's disease diagnosis, as well as a generalizable approach for linking deep learning to pathophysiological processes in human disease.

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 · 10.1093/brain/awaa137

Cites

35 of 35 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?

  • The authors previously reported interpretable deep learning approaches capable of distinguishing participants with normal cognition from those with AD using MRI scans, age, sex, and MMSE.

    “we have previously reported interpretable deep learning approaches capable of distinguishing participants with age-appropriate normal cognition (NC) from those with AD using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans, age, sex, and mini-mental state examination (MMSE)17.”
  • The authors previously developed and externally validated an interpretable deep learning approach to classify AD using multimodal inputs of MRI and clinical variables.

    “Previously, we developed and externally validated an interpretable deep learning approach to classify AD using multimodal inputs of MRI and clinical variables17.”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Qiu, S., Joshi, P. S., Miller, M. I., Xue, C., Zhou, X., Karjadi, C., Chang, G. H., Joshi, A. S., Dwyer, B., Zhu, S., Kaku, M., Zhou, Y., Alderazi, Y. J., Swaminathan, A., Kedar, S., Saint-Hilaire, M.-H., Auerbach, S. H., Yuan, J., Sartor, E. A., Au, R., & Kolachalama, V. B.
Affiliations
  • Boston University (US)
  • Georgia Institute of Technology (US)
  • Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College (CN)
  • The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (US)
  • University of Nebraska Medical Center (US)
  • Department of Neurology, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA
Corresponding author
Kolachalama, Vijaya B
Venue
Brain
Published
2020-05-01
Volume
143
Issue
6
Pages
1920-1933
ISSN
  • 0006-8950 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2156
OpenAlex
W3023079706
Cited by
472
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 58 · 2025: 98 · 2024: 92 · 2023: 76 · 2022: 84 · 2021: 55 · 2020: 8
FWCI
40.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Brain (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
  • National Institutes of Health (1UL1TR001430)
  • Scientist Development (17SDG33670323)
  • American Heart Association
  • Hariri Research Award
  • Hariri Institute for Computing and Computational Science & Engineering at Boston University
  • Framingham Heart Study’s National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (N01-HC-25195, HHSN268201500001I)
  • NIH (R56-AG062109, AG008122, R01-AG016495, R01-AG033040)
  • Boston University’s Affinity Research Collaboratives
  • Boston University Alzheimer’s Disease Center (P30-AG013846)
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
Alzheimer's disease, Alzheimer's disease diagnosis, explainable deep learning, multimodal neuroimaging, magnetic resonance imaging, fully convolutional network, Mini-Mental State Examination, dementia, postmortem histopathology
MeSH terms
Deep Learning, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Algorithms, Alzheimer Disease, Australia, Brain, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Models, Statistical, Biomarkers, Disease Progression, Neuroimaging, Cognitive Dysfunction

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