ArticleHuman brain mapping2025
Brain Age Prediction: Deep Models Need a Hand to Generalize.
Article in Human brain mapping, 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.
- Brain Age Prediction: Deep Models Need a Hand to Generalize.Human brain mapping · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Predicting brain age from T1-weighted MRI is a promising marker for understanding brain aging and its associated conditions. While deep learning models have shown success in reducing the mean absolute error (MAE) of predicted brain age, concerns about robust and accurate generalization in new data limit their clinical applicability. The large number of trainable parameters, combined with limited medical imaging training data, contributes to this challenge, often resulting in a generalization gap where there is a significant discrepancy between model performance on training data versus unseen data. In this study, we assess a deep model, SFCN-reg, based on the VGG-16 architecture, and address the generalization gap through comprehensive preprocessing, extensive data augmentation, and model regularization. Using training data from the UK Biobank, we demonstrate substantial improvements in model performance. Specifically, our approach reduces the generalization MAE by 47% (from 5.25 to 2.79 years) in the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative dataset and by 12% (from 4.35 to 3.75 years) in the Australian Imaging, Biomarker and Lifestyle dataset. Furthermore, we achieve up to 13% reduction in scan-rescan error (from 0.80 to 0.70 years) while enhancing the model's robustness to registration errors. Feature importance maps highlight anatomical regions used to predict age. These results highlight the critical role of high-quality preprocessing and robust training techniques in improving accuracy and narrowing the generalization gap, both necessary steps toward the clinical use of brain age prediction models. Our study makes valuable contributions to neuroimaging research by offering a potential pathway to improve the clinical applicability of 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.