ArticleJournal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD2025
Diagnostic and prognostic multimodal prediction models in Alzheimer's disease: A scoping review.
Article in Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-World Multimodal Machine Learning for Risk Enrichment Across the Alzheimer's Disease Spectrum.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Interpretable Machine Learning for Risk Stratification of Hippocampal Atrophy in Alzheimer's Disease Using CSF Erythrocyte Load and Clinical Data.Biomedicines · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BackgroundMultimodal prediction models for Alzheimer's disease (AD) are emerging as promising tools for improving detection and informing prognosis.ObjectiveTo summarize the predictive objectives, constituting predictors and algorithms, and performance of existing multimodal prediction models.MethodsWe performed a systematic literature search in Medline, Embase, and Web of Science up to January 15, 2024, to identify prediction models covering the full spectrum of AD, from the preclinical stage to subjective cognitive decline (SCD), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and AD dementia. The predictors, algorithms, and model performance of prediction models were summarized narratively by their predictive objectives. The review protocol was registered with the Open Science Framework (osf.io/zkw6g).ResultsPredicting the future progression from MCI to AD dementia was the most common objective of prediction models for AD. The second most common objective was to classify AD stages (SCD versus MCI versus AD dementia), followed by detecting the presence of amyloid, tau, or neurodegeneration. More than half of the prediction models reported an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve exceeding 0.8 and an accuracy exceeding 70%. However, 66.7% of the prediction models were developed using data from the ADNI study, and only 10.1% of the models went through external validation.ConclusionsExisting multimodal prediction models have mainly focused on the prediction of current or future AD stages and reported good performance. However, these models need to be validated using data other than the data used for model training before being considered for practical applications.
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.