ArticleScientific reports2026
Imaging-genetics-based dementia risk prediction using deep survival neural networks in the Rotterdam Study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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.
- Interpretable multimodal learning for integrating neuroimaging and genetic data in Alzheimer's disease.Frontiers in radiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Accurate dementia risk prediction is challenging, and may be facilitated by better use of imaging and genetic data, including their complex interactions. We explored using deep survival neural networks to integrate these multi-modal, high-dimensional data. We included 3521 Rotterdam Study participants, 6340 magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans, with follow-up clinical diagnosis for dementia, and used 515 samples from Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) as an external validation. Genetic data included APOE-ε4 status and 76 additional SNPs. We developed models combining Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) and Cox Proportional Hazards (CPH) models and provided post-hoc explanations. Our models outperformed CPH models including age, sex, and genetic inputs in both Rotterdam Study and ADNI by C-index of 0.88/0.63 V.S. 0.85/0.58, p-value of 0.02/0.002. Although their performance did not surpass CPH models also included MRI markers (0.89/0.66), additional predictability was obtained in age-stratified prediction in ADNI. Incorporating CNN image features in CPH models further increased performance to highest C-index of 0.90/0.69. Age and image had the highest importance in prediction, with age, image and genetic features showing the strongest interactions. Our approach indicates that imaging and genetic data can be feasibly integrated for dementia risk prediction, with informative extraction, reliable explanations and potential predictive gains.
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.