Predicting probable Alzheimer's disease using linguistic deficits and biomarkers
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: The manual diagnosis of neurodegenerative disorders such as Alzheimer's disease (AD) and related Dementias has been a challenge. Currently, these disorders are diagnosed using specific clinical diagnostic criteria and neuropsychological examinations. The use of several Machine Learning algorithms to build automated diagnostic models using low-level linguistic features resulting from verbal utterances could aid diagnosis of patients with probable AD from a large population. For this purpose, we developed different Machine Learning models on the DementiaBank language transcript clinical dataset, consisting of 99 patients with probable AD and 99 healthy controls. RESULTS: Our models learned several syntactic, lexical, and n-gram linguistic biomarkers to distinguish the probable AD group from the healthy group. In contrast to the healthy group, we found that the probable AD patients had significantly less usage of syntactic components and significantly higher usage of lexical components in their language. Also, we observed a significant difference in the use of n-grams as the healthy group were able to identify and make sense of more objects in their n-grams than the probable AD group. As such, our best diagnostic model significantly distinguished the probable AD group from the healthy elderly group with a better Area Under the Receiving Operating Characteristics Curve (AUC) using the Support Vector Machines (SVM). CONCLUSIONS: Experimental and statistical evaluations suggest that using ML algorithms for learning linguistic biomarkers from the verbal utterances of elderly individuals could help the clinical diagnosis of probable AD. We emphasise that the best ML model for predicting the disease group combines significant syntactic, lexical and top n-gram features. However, there is a need to train the diagnostic models on larger datasets, which could lead to a better AUC and clinical diagnosis of probable AD.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
In Alzheimer's disease, ASLA markers differentiate patients from healthy persons and other patient groups, predict overall cognitive status, outperform certain cognitive tests in predicting dementia onset, and correlate with volume of the hippocampus and other core atrophy regions.
“In Alzheimer's disease, they differentiate patients from healthy persons 13,58-62 and other patient groups, 63 predict overall cognitive status, 64 outperform certain cognitive tests in predicting dementia onset, 65 and correlate with volume of the hippocampus and other core atrophy regions. 66,67”
From Speech and language markers of neurodegeneration: a call for global equity (2023) · cites this paper as [62]
Papers lacking health assessment information do not specify their criteria for group assignment.
“Therefore, papers lacking that information do not specify their criteria for group assignment [60, 61, 75, 79, 80, 82–85].”
From Artificial Intelligence, Speech, and Language Processing Approaches to Monitoring Alzheimer’s Disease: A Systematic Review (2020) · cites this paper as [75]
Only [75, 90] share the exact specification of the subset of the Pitt Corpus used for their analysis.
“However, only [75, 90] share the exact specification of the subset of Pitt Corpus used for their analysis, in order for other researchers to be able to replicate their findings”
From Artificial Intelligence, Speech, and Language Processing Approaches to Monitoring Alzheimer’s Disease: A Systematic Review (2020) · cites this paper as [75]
Several other studies choose leave-pair-out CV.
“Several other studies choose leave-pair-out CV instead [7, 70, 73, 75, 78, 97], since it produces unbiased estimates for AUC and also reduces potential size bias.”
From Artificial Intelligence, Speech, and Language Processing Approaches to Monitoring Alzheimer’s Disease: A Systematic Review (2020) · cites this paper as [75]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 76 · Cited by 158
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- [23]Ball MJ Perkins MR Müller N Howard S The Handbook of Clinical Linguistics: Vol 56 2009 USA John Wiley & Sons
- [40]MacWhinney B The CHILDES Project: The Database 2000 New York Psychology Press
- Authors
- Orimaye, S. O., Wong, J. S.-M., Golden, K. J., Wong, C. P., & Soyiri, I. N.
- Affiliations
- Monash University Malaysia (MY)
- University of Edinburgh (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Orimaye, Sylvester O.
- Venue
- BMC Bioinformatics
- Published
- 2017-01-14
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 34-34
- ISSN
- 1471-2105 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC5237556
- OpenAlex
- W2576151354
- Cited by
- 158
- References
- 76
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 10.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- BMC Bioinformatics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Repository@Hull (Worktribe) (University of Hull) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Monash University Research Portal (Monash University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Malaysian Ministry of Education Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS) (FRGS/2/2014/ICT07/ MUSM/03/1)
- 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 › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Keywords
- Alzheimer's disease, dementia diagnosis, linguistic biomarkers, speech analysis, verbal utterances, syntactic features, lexical features, n-gram features, DementiaBank, automated diagnosis, support vector machine, elderly patients
- MeSH terms
- Machine Learning, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Algorithms, Alzheimer Disease, Humans, Linguistics, Middle Aged, Speech, Biomarkers
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