Cited by 84Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies

Diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease severity with fMRI images using robust multitask feature extraction method and convolutional neural network (CNN)

Open access
Amini, Morteza, Pedram, Mir Mohsen, Moradi, AliReza, Ouchani, Mahshad·2021·Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine

Abstract

The automatic diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease plays an important role in human health, especially in its early stage. Because it is a neurodegenerative condition, Alzheimer’s disease seems to have a long incubation period. Therefore, it is essential to analyze Alzheimer’s symptoms at different stages. In this paper, the classification is done with several methods of machine learning consisting of K -nearest neighbor (KNN), support vector machine (SVM), decision tree (DT), linear discrimination analysis (LDA), and random forest (RF). Moreover, novel convolutional neural network (CNN) architecture is presented to diagnose Alzheimer’s severity. The relationship between Alzheimer’s patients’ functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) images and their scores on the MMSE is investigated to achieve the aim. The feature extraction is performed based on the robust multitask feature learning algorithm. The severity is also calculated based on the Mini-Mental State Examination score, including low, mild, moderate, and severe categories. Results show that the accuracy of the KNN, SVM, DT, LDA, RF, and presented CNN method is 77.5%, 85.8%, 91.7%, 79.5%, 85.1%, and 96.7%, respectively. Moreover, for the presented CNN architecture, the sensitivity of low, mild, moderate, and severe status of Alzheimer patients is 98.1%, 95.2%,89.0%, and 87.5%, respectively. Based on the findings, the presented CNN architecture classifier outperforms other methods and can diagnose the severity and stages of Alzheimer’s disease with maximum accuracy.

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 · 10.1155/2021/5514839

Cites

63 of 63 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?

  • DNN classifiers have shown superior performance compared to traditional machine learning methods such as support vector machines and random forest for accurate classification of disease groups using neuroimaging data.

    “DNN classifiers have shown superior performance compared to traditional machine learning methods, such as support vector machines (SVM) and random forest for accurate classification of disease groups using neuroimaging data (Schmidhuber, 2015; Eslami and Saeed, 2019; Amini et al., 2021).”

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

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 64 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [30]Ortiz A. Munilla J. Martínez-Murcia F. J. Górriz J. M. Ramírez J. Alzheimer's disease neuroimaging initiative. Learning longitudinal MRI patterns by SICE and deep learning: assessing the Alzheimer's disease progression Annual conference on medical image understanding and analysis 2017 Cham 413 424
  2. [43]Khvostikov A. Aderghal K. Benois-Pineau J. Krylov A. Catheline G. 3D CNN-based classification using sMRI and MD-DTI images for Alzheimer's disease studies 2018 https://arxiv.org/abs/1801.05968 · arXiv
  3. [56]Gong P. Ye J. Zhang C. Robust multitask feature learning Proceedings of the 18th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining 2012 Beijing, China 895 903 PMC3783219 24078896

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Amini, M., Pedram, M. M., Moradi, A., & Ouchani, M.
Affiliations
  • Institute for Cognitive Science Studies (IR)
  • Kharazmi University (IR)
  • Shahid Beheshti University (IR)
Corresponding author
Pedram, Mir Mohsen
Venue
Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2021-04-28
Volume
2021
Pages
1-15
ISSN
  • 1748-670X (ISSN-L)
  • 1748-6718
OpenAlex
W3157749950
Cited by
84
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 7
FWCI
10.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
Keywords
Alzheimer's disease, disease severity classification, functional MRI, convolutional neural networks, feature extraction, Mini-Mental State Examination, early diagnosis, neurodegenerative diseases
MeSH terms
Mental Status and Dementia Tests, Deep Learning, Algorithms, Alzheimer Disease, Brain, Decision Trees, Humans, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Severity of Illness Index, Discriminant Analysis, Databases, Factual, Neural Networks, Computer, Computational Biology, Early Diagnosis, Functional Neuroimaging, 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