ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association2025
Machine learning diagnosis of cognitive impairment and dementia in harmonized older adult cohorts.
Article in Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 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.
- Machine learning diagnosis of cognitive impairment and dementia in harmonized older adult cohorts.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Article
- Beyond black-box AI: Interpretable hybrid systems for dementia care.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionClinical diagnosis (normal cognition, mild cognitive impairment [MCI], dementia) is critical for understanding cognitive impairment and dementia but can be resource intensive and subject to inconsistencies due to complex clinical judgments that are required. Machine learning approaches might provide meaningful additions and/or alternatives to traditional clinical diagnosis.
methodsThe study sample was composed of three harmonized longitudinal cohorts of demographically diverse older adults. We used the XGBoost extreme gradient boosting platform to predict clinical diagnosis using different feature sets.
resultsMeasures of cognition were especially important predictive features of clinical diagnosis. Prediction accuracy was higher in a sample that had longer follow-up, better balance across diagnostic outcomes, and both self- and informant-report independent function measures. DISCUSSION: Algorithmic diagnosis might be a meaningful substitute for clinical diagnosis in studies in which clinical evaluation and diagnosis are not feasible for all participants and may provide a standardized alternative when clinical diagnosis is available. HIGHLIGHTS: A machine learning algorithm was used to diagnose cognitive impairment and dementia. Measures of cognition were strongest predictive features for clinical diagnosis. Algorithm accuracy was improved by informant-report independent function measures. Algorithmic diagnosis might be an alternative if clinical diagnosis is not feasible. Standardization is an important advantage of algorithmic diagnosis.
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.