Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37190655›Full record

ArticleBrain sciences2023

Machine Learning-Based Routine Laboratory Tests Predict One-Year Cognitive and Functional Decline in a Population Aged 75+ Years.

Karina Braga Gomes, Ramon Gonçalves Pereira, Alexandre Alberto Braga, Henrique Cerqueira Guimarães, Elisa de Paula França Resende, Antônio Lúcio Teixeira, Maira Tonidandel Barbosa, Wagner Meira Junior, Maria das Graças Carvalho, Paulo Caramelli

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Karina Braga GomesFaculdade de Farmácia, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte 31270-901, MG, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-6870-2063
Ramon Gonçalves PereiraInstituto de Ciências Exatas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte 31270-901, MG, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-7874-3398
Alexandre Alberto BragaFaculdade de Farmácia, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte 31270-901, MG, Brazil.
Henrique Cerqueira GuimarãesFaculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte 31270-901, MG, Brazil.
Elisa de Paula França ResendeHospital das Clínicas (EBSERH), Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte 31270-901, MG, Brazil.
Antônio Lúcio TeixeiraFaculdade Santa Casa BH, Belo Horizonte 30110-005, MG, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-9621-5422
Maira Tonidandel BarbosaFaculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte 31270-901, MG, Brazil.
Wagner Meira JuniorInstituto de Ciências Exatas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte 31270-901, MG, Brazil.
Maria das Graças CarvalhoFaculdade de Farmácia, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte 31270-901, MG, Brazil.
Paulo CaramelliFaculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte 31270-901, MG, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-4786-6990
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais · BRHospital das Clínicas da Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais · BR

Funding

National Council for Scientific and Technological Development Not applied
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCognitive and functional decline are common problems in older adults, especially in those 75+ years old. Currently, there is no specific plasma biomarker able to predict this decline in healthy old-age people. Machine learning (ML) is a subarea of artificial intelligence (AI), which can be used to predict outcomes Aim: This study aimed to evaluate routine laboratory variables able to predict cognitive and functional impairment, using ML algorithms, in a cohort aged 75+ years, in a one-year follow-up study.

methodOne hundred and thirty-two older adults aged 75+ years were selected through a community-health public program or from long-term-care institutions. Their functional and cognitive performances were evaluated at baseline and one year later using a functional activities questionnaire, Mini-Mental State Examination, and the Brief Cognitive Screening Battery. Routine laboratory tests were performed at baseline. ML algorithms-random forest, support vector machine (SVM), and XGBoost-were applied in order to describe the best model able to predict cognitive and functional decline using routine tests as features.

resultsThe random forest model showed better accuracy than other algorithms and included triglycerides, glucose, hematocrit, red cell distribution width (RDW), albumin, hemoglobin, globulin, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-c), thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH), creatinine, lymphocyte, erythrocyte, platelet/leucocyte (PLR), and neutrophil/leucocyte (NLR) ratios, and alanine transaminase (ALT), leukocyte, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c), cortisol, gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT), and eosinophil as features to predict cognitive decline (accuracy = 0.79). For functional decline, the most important features were platelet, PLR and NLR, hemoglobin, globulin, cortisol, RDW, glucose, basophil, B12 vitamin, creatinine, GGT, ALT, aspartate transferase (AST), eosinophil, hematocrit, erythrocyte, triglycerides, HDL-c, and monocyte (accuracy = 0.92).

conclusionsRoutine laboratory variables could be applied to predict cognitive and functional decline in oldest-old populations using ML algorithms.

Indexed as

cognitive declinefunctional declinelaboratory variablesmachine learning

Identifiers

PMID37190655
PMCPMC10137192
OpenAlexW4366775658

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.