ArticleNPJ digital medicine2026
A dynamic risk prediction framework for Alzheimer's disease and related dementias with interpretability.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) develop years before symptoms emerge, making early prediction critical. Electronic health records (EHR) offer a scalable alternative to neuroimaging but are challenged by irregular encounters, data sparsity, and limited interpretability. We propose Gated Recurrent Unit with Decay & Attention (GRU-DA), which integrates GRU-D missingness modeling with RETAIN-style attention for interpretable risk monitoring. The model was trained on the University of Texas Physicians EHR (15,172 ADRD cases with 1:10 matched controls) and externally validated in the All of Us cohort. EHR data up to 10 years before diagnosis were used, with random follow-up initiation to reflect real-world encounters. Both GRU-DA and GRU-D outperformed competing models, particularly beyond 5 years of follow-up and achieved AUROC ~ 0.7 after 8.5 years. Prediction performance depended more on data availability than follow-up length: 1 year with 15% data availability (AUROC 0.75, Average Precision 0.5) was comparable to 7.5 years with 10% availability. For individual cases, GRU-DA produced stable risk predictions with some variability in timestep and feature-level attributions across folds. These results demonstrate EHR data can support dynamic ADRD risk monitoring up to 10 years before diagnosis, with effectiveness strongly influenced by data completeness.
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.