ArticlePCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences2025
Development and validation of a combined clinical and MRI-based biomarker model to differentiate mild cognitive impairment from mild Alzheimer's disease.
Article in PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences, 2025. 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.
- Development and validation of a combined clinical and MRI-based biomarker model to differentiate mild cognitive impairment from mild Alzheimer's disease.PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 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
Background: Two of the most common complaints seen in neurology clinics are Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI), characterized by similar symptoms. The aim of this study was to develop and internally validate the diagnostic value of combined neurological and radiological predictors in differentiating mild AD from MCI as the outcome variable, which helps in preventing AD development. Methods: A cross-sectional study of 161 participants was conducted in a general healthcare setting, including 30 controls, 71 mild AD, and 60 MCI. Binary logistic regression was used to identify predictors of interest, with collinearity assessment conducted prior to model development. Model performance was assessed through calibration, shrinkage, and decision-curve analyses. Finally, the combined clinical and radiological model was compared to models utilizing only clinical or radiological predictors. Results: The final model included age, sex, education status, Montreal cognitive assessment, Global Cerebral Atrophy Index, Medial Temporal Atrophy Scale, mean hippocampal volume, and Posterior Parietal Atrophy Index, with the area under the curve of 0.978 (0.934-0.996). Internal validation methods did not show substantial reduction in diagnostic performance. Combined model showed higher diagnostic performance compared to clinical and radiological models alone. Decision curve analysis highlighted the usefulness of this model for differentiation across all probability levels. Conclusion: A combined clinical-radiological model has excellent diagnostic performance in differentiating mild AD from MCI. Notably, the model leveraged straightforward neuroimaging markers, which are relatively simple to measure and interpret, suggesting that they could be integrated into practical, formula-driven diagnostic workflows without requiring computationally intensive deep learning models.
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.