Article in Human brain mapping, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it
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.
2 · The registry
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.
An ZhaoUCL Hawkes Institute, University College London, London, UK.
Jiongqi QuUCL Hawkes Institute, University College London, London, UK.
Phoebe ImmsLeonard Davis School of Gerontology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Andrei IrimiaLeonard Davis School of Gerontology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Frederik BarkhofUCL Hawkes Institute, University College London, London, UK.
James H ColeUCL Hawkes Institute, University College London, London, UK.
Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative
Funding
Project 1U19AG024904 · NIA · NORTHERN CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE/RES/EDU · PI MONICA G. RIVERA-MINDT · 2016 to 2026
$226.7M
National Alzheimer's Coordinating CenterU24AG072122 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI STEPHENS, KARI A · 2021 to 2025
$45.8M
Research Education ComponentP30AG062422 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Katherine P Rankin · 2019 to 2026
$36.9M
Research Education ComponentP30AG062421 · NIA · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI Christine S Ritchie · 2019 to 2026
$36.5M
UCSD Shiley-Marcos Alzheimer's Disease Research Center P30P30AG062429 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI DOUGLAS R GALASKO · 2019 to 2026
$34.9M
Wisconsin Alzheimer's Disease Research CenterP30AG062715 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI Sanjay Asthana · 2019 to 2026
$34.5M
Research Education ComponentP30AG062677 · NIA · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI KEJAL KANTARCI · 2019 to 2026
$33.5M
Research Education ComponentP30AG066514 · NIA · ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI · PI Margaret Sewell · 2020 to 2026
$31.0M
Yale Alzheimer Disease Research CenterP30AG066508 · NIA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI STEPHEN M STRITTMATTER · 2020 to 2026
$30.2M
Research Education CoreP30AG066462 · NIA · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI PHILIP L DE JAGER · 2020 to 2026
$30.1M
Research Education ComponentP30AG066468 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI C. Elizabeth Shaaban · 2020 to 2026
$29.4M
Research Education ComponentP30AG066507 · NIA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Corinne Pettigrew · 2020 to 2026
Artificial intelligence and neuroimaging enable accurate dementia prediction but often involve 'black box' models that can be difficult to trust. Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) aims to provide insights into the model's decisions; however, choosing the most appropriate method is non-trivial and often context-specific. We used T1-weighted MRI to train models on two tasks: Alzheimer's disease (AD) classification (diagnosis) and predicting conversion from mild-cognitive impairment (MCI) to all-cause dementia (prognosis). We applied eleven XAI methods across two popular image classification architectures, producing visualisations of the most salient regions. We also propose a framework for interpreting explanations produced by different XAI methods and predictive models. Models achieved balanced accuracies of 81% and 67% for diagnosis and prognosis. XAI outputs highlighted brain regions relevant to AD with strong convergence across gradient-based techniques. LIME produced explanations that were most similar across architectures. Mean saliency enhanced MCI prognosis prediction when included as an additional input feature. XAI can be used to verify that models are utilising relevant features and to generate valuable measures for further analysis.
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.
Investigating the Utility of Explainable Artificial Intelligence for Neuroimaging-Based Dementia Diagnosis and Prognosis. · full record | Socratic