ArticleBMC medical imaging2026
Amyloid-beta statuses prediction with free water MR imaging features in Alzheimer's disease using machine learning models.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to identify the effectiveness of free water MRI (FW-MRI) features for predicting amyloid-beta (Aβ) statuses in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) by constructing diagnostic models using machine learning analysis.
methodsThis study retrospectively included 96 patients of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and AD (69 Aβ-positive and 27 Aβ-negative). Clinical characteristics, FW-corrected and standard diffusion indices, and structural MRI indices were collected. Three supervised machine learning algorithms, including random forest (RF), support vector machine (SVM), and extreme gradient boosting (XGB), were adopted to construct a diagnostic model for distinguishing Aβ deposition in AD. SHapley Additive exPlanation (SHAP) value was used as an interpretable algorithm to identify influential characteristics based on the best-performing model.
resultsIn the single-modality model, FW-DTI achieved better classification performance than conventional DTI, which obtained accuracies all above 80% among three machine learning approaches on the internal dataset (RF = 0.800, SVM = 0.867, XGB = 0.800). In the multi-modality model, the XGB model integrated FW-DTI, voxel-based morphometry, and clinical features outperformed the RF and SVM models, achieving an accuracy of 86.7% and an area under the curves (AUC) value 93.2% in the training cohort, and an accuracy of 77.8% and AUC value of 83.1% in the external testing cohort. The model demonstrated high sensitivity but relatively low specificity, indicating a tendency toward positive predictions. Furthermore, FW-DTI indices were shown to have the highest predictive value for Aβ deposition.
conclusionIntegrating FW-DTI with structural and clinical features effectively differentiated Aβ positivity in AD, with FW-DTI indices contributing the highest predictive risks, demonstrating the potential of FW-DTI in AD 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.