ArticlePloS one2024
A bilateral filtering-based image enhancement for Alzheimer disease classification using CNN.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Convolutional neural network models of structural MRI for discriminating categories of cognitive impairment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC neurology · 2025Pooled it
- Computer-Aided Decision Support Systems of Alzheimer's Disease Diagnosis - A Systematic Review.Current medical imaging · 2025Pooled it
- Convolutional neural networks in brain disease diagnosis: a unified review of Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and brain tumor classification.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
- Optimized fault-tolerant data processing module for high-reliability CNN accelerator.PloS one · 2026Article
- Guided sparse decomposition with anisotropic fusion for medical image enhancement.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- A novel interpreted deep network for Alzheimer's disease prediction based on inverted self attention and vision transformer.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- IoT-driven smart assistive communication system for the hearing impaired with hybrid deep learning models for sign language recognition.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Intelligent Alzheimer's diagnosis and disability assessment: robust medical imaging analysis using ensemble learning with ResNet-50 and EfficientNet-B3.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- DenseIncepS115: a novel network-level fusion framework for Alzheimer's disease prediction using MRI images.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to develop an optimally performing convolutional neural network to classify Alzheimer's disease into mild cognitive impairment, normal controls, or Alzheimer's disease classes using a magnetic resonance imaging dataset. To achieve this, we focused the study on addressing the challenge of image noise, which impacts the performance of deep learning models. The study introduced a scheme for enhancing images to improve the quality of the datasets. Specifically, an image enhancement algorithm based on histogram equalization and bilateral filtering techniques was deployed to reduce noise and enhance the quality of the images. Subsequently, a convolutional neural network model comprising four convolutional layers and two hidden layers was devised for classifying Alzheimer's disease into three (3) distinct categories, namely mild cognitive impairment, Alzheimer's disease, and normal controls. The model was trained and evaluated using a 10-fold cross-validation sampling approach with a learning rate of 0.001 and 200 training epochs at each instance. The proposed model yielded notable results, such as an accuracy of 93.45% and an area under the curve value of 0.99 when trained on the three classes. The model further showed superior results on binary classification compared with existing methods. The model recorded 94.39%, 94.92%, and 95.62% accuracies for Alzheimer's disease versus normal controls, Alzheimer's disease versus mild cognitive impairment, and mild cognitive impairment versus normal controls classes, respectively.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.