ArticleHeliyon2024
Using machine learning model for predicting risk of memory decline: A cross sectional study.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Background: Memory decline is the earliest symptom of various neurodegenerative disease, such as Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, accurately the prediction and identification of risk factors leading up to memory decline has remained limited. Objective: The objective of this study is to create and verify a machine learning model that can accurately predict risk factors for memory decline among US adults. Methods: A total of 9971 individuals were enrolled from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2015-2016 database. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) was used to screen for characteristic predictors. Five machine learning (ML) algorithms: including Logistic Regression, ExtraTrees classifier, Bagging classifier, eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), and Random Forest (RF) were employed. The performance of each model was evaluated by confusion matrix, area under curve (AUC), accuracy, precision, specificity, Recall and F1 scores. Results: The ultimate sample comprised 4525 subjects, of whom 7.7 % (N = 347) exhibited memory deterioration. The ExtraTrees classifier model and the XGBoost model demonstrated superior prediction performance and clinical value compared to other independent machine learning models, based on the AUC value of 0.915 and 0.911. Additionally, they consistently demonstrated accurate predicting ability for memory decline in the external datasets, with an AUC of 0.851 and 0.843, respectively. Conclusion: The ExtraTrees classifier and the XGBoost models were the two outperformed models in predicting memory decline. Nevertheless, it is necessary to conduct future investigations to confirm the accuracy of our findings.
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.