Dataset Information

Machine learning for the life-time risk prediction of Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT: Alzheimer's disease is a neurodegenerative disorder and the most common form of dementia. Early diagnosis may assist interventions to delay onset and reduce the progression rate of the disease. We systematically reviewed the use of machine learning algorithms for predicting Alzheimer's disease using single nucleotide polymorphisms and instances where these were combined with other types of data. We evaluated the ability of machine learning models to distinguish between controls and cases, while also assessing their implementation and potential biases. Articles published between December 2009 and June 2020 were collected using Scopus, PubMed and Google Scholar. These were systematically screened for inclusion leading to a final set of 12 publications. Eighty-five per cent of the included studies used the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative dataset. In studies which reported area under the curve, discrimination varied (0.49-0.97). However, more than half of the included manuscripts used other forms of measurement, such as accuracy, sensitivity and specificity. Model calibration statistics were also found to be reported inconsistently across all studies. The most frequent limitation in the assessed studies was sample size, with the total number of participants often numbering less than a thousand, whilst the number of predictors usually ran into the many thousands. In addition, key steps in model implementation and validation were often not performed or unreported, making it difficult to assess the capability of machine learning models.

SUBMITTER: Rowe TW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8598986 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Currently there are no reliable biomarkers for early detection of Alzheimer's disease (AD) at the preclinical stage. This study assessed the pupil light reflex (PLR) for focal red and blue light stimuli in central and peripheral retina in 125 cognitively normal middle age subjects (45-71 years old) at high risk for AD due to a family history of the disease (FH+), and 61 age-similar subjects with no family history of AD (FH-) using Chromatic Pupilloperimetry coupled with Machine Learning (ML). All subjects had normal ophthalmic assessment, and normal retinal and optic nerve thickness by optical coherence tomography. No significant differences were observed between groups in cognitive function and volumetric brain MRI. Chromatic pupilloperimetry-based ML models were highly discriminative in differentiating subjects with and without AD family history, using transient PLR for focal red (primarily cone-mediated), and dim blue (primarily rod-mediated) light stimuli. Features associated with transient pupil response latency (PRL) achieved Area Under the Curve Receiver Operating Characteristic (AUC-ROC) of 0.90 ± 0.051 (left-eye) and 0.87 ± 0.048 (right-eye). Parameters associated with the contraction arm of the rod and cone-mediated PLR were more discriminative compared to parameters associated with the relaxation arm and melanopsin-mediated PLR. Significantly shorter PRL for dim blue light was measured in the FH+ group in two test targets in the temporal visual field in right eye that had highest relative weight in the ML algorithm (mean ± standard error, SE 0.449 s ± 0.007 s vs. 0.478 s ± 0.010 s, p = 0.038). Taken together our study suggests that subtle focal changes in pupil contraction latency may be detected in subjects at high risk to develop AD, decades before the onset of AD clinical symptoms. The dendrites of melanopsin containing retinal ganglion cells may be affected very early at the preclinical stages of AD.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Prognostication is an essential tool for risk adjustment and decision making in the intensive care unit (ICU). Research into prognostication in ICU has so far been limited to data from admission or the first 24 hours. Most ICU admissions last longer than this, decisions are made throughout an admission, and some admissions are explicitly intended as time-limited prognostic trials. Despite this, temporal changes in prognostic ability during ICU admission has received little attention to date. Current predictive models, in the form of prognostic clinical tools, are typically derived from linear models and do not explicitly handle incremental information from trends. Machine learning (ML) allows predictive models to be developed which use non-linear predictors and complex interactions between variables, thus allowing incorporation of trends in measured variables over time; this has made it possible to investigate prognosis throughout an admission. METHODS AND FINDINGS:This study uses ML to assess the predictability of ICU mortality as a function of time. Logistic regression against physiological data alone outperformed APACHE-II and demonstrated several important interactions including between lactate & noradrenaline dose, between lactate & MAP, and between age & MAP consistent with the current sepsis definitions. ML models consistently outperformed logistic regression with Deep Learning giving the best results. Predictive power was maximal on the second day and was further improved by incorporating trend data. Using a limited range of physiological and demographic variables, the best machine learning model on the first day showed an area under the receiver-operator characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.883 (σ = 0.008), compared to 0.846 (σ = 0.010) for a logistic regression from the same predictors and 0.836 (σ = 0.007) for a logistic regression based on the APACHE-II score. Adding information gathered on the second day of admission improved the maximum AUC to 0.895 (σ = 0.008). Beyond the second day, predictive ability declined. CONCLUSION:This has implications for decision making in intensive care and provides a justification for time-limited trials of ICU therapy; the assessment of prognosis over more than one day may be a valuable strategy as new information on the second day helps to differentiate outcomes. New ML models based on trend data beyond the first day could greatly improve upon current risk stratification tools.

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the methodological quality of studies on prediction models developed using machine learning techniques across all medical specialties.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesPubMed from 1 January 2018 to 31 December 2019.Eligibility criteriaArticles reporting on the development, with or without external validation, of a multivariable prediction model (diagnostic or prognostic) developed using supervised machine learning for individualised predictions. No restrictions applied for study design, data source, or predicted patient related health outcomes.Review methodsMethodological quality of the studies was determined and risk of bias evaluated using the prediction risk of bias assessment tool (PROBAST). This tool contains 21 signalling questions tailored to identify potential biases in four domains. Risk of bias was measured for each domain (participants, predictors, outcome, and analysis) and each study (overall).Results152 studies were included: 58 (38%) included a diagnostic prediction model and 94 (62%) a prognostic prediction model. PROBAST was applied to 152 developed models and 19 external validations. Of these 171 analyses, 148 (87%, 95% confidence interval 81% to 91%) were rated at high risk of bias. The analysis domain was most frequently rated at high risk of bias. Of the 152 models, 85 (56%, 48% to 64%) were developed with an inadequate number of events per candidate predictor, 62 handled missing data inadequately (41%, 33% to 49%), and 59 assessed overfitting improperly (39%, 31% to 47%). Most models used appropriate data sources to develop (73%, 66% to 79%) and externally validate the machine learning based prediction models (74%, 51% to 88%). Information about blinding of outcome and blinding of predictors was, however, absent in 60 (40%, 32% to 47%) and 79 (52%, 44% to 60%) of the developed models, respectively.ConclusionMost studies on machine learning based prediction models show poor methodological quality and are at high risk of bias. Factors contributing to risk of bias include small study size, poor handling of missing data, and failure to deal with overfitting. Efforts to improve the design, conduct, reporting, and validation of such studies are necessary to boost the application of machine learning based prediction models in clinical practice.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42019161764.

Dataset Information

Machine learning for the life-time risk prediction of Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets