2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2015.08.011
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Unsupervised learning based feature extraction for differential diagnosis of neurodegenerative diseases: A case study on early-stage diagnosis of Parkinson disease

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
42
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
4
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 65 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
0
42
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The somewhat subjective nature of UPDRS evaluation makes this scale also prone to inter-rater variability. There have been multiple attempts to improve the reliability and accuracy of disease metrics and establishing early diagnosis, such as feature extraction algorithms using MRI data (Noh et al, 2015, Singh and Samavedham, 2015), population-based modeling using a combination of genetic and clinical data (Nalls et al, 2015) or combination of DAT SPECT and clinical data (Suwijn et al, 2015). Despite this, though we recognize uncertainties associated with onset (both time of diagnosis and time of first reported symptom) and disease metrics, the present framework with image-driven textural features had to rely on standard and validated data such as UPDRS and best available date of first symptom/diagnosis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The somewhat subjective nature of UPDRS evaluation makes this scale also prone to inter-rater variability. There have been multiple attempts to improve the reliability and accuracy of disease metrics and establishing early diagnosis, such as feature extraction algorithms using MRI data (Noh et al, 2015, Singh and Samavedham, 2015), population-based modeling using a combination of genetic and clinical data (Nalls et al, 2015) or combination of DAT SPECT and clinical data (Suwijn et al, 2015). Despite this, though we recognize uncertainties associated with onset (both time of diagnosis and time of first reported symptom) and disease metrics, the present framework with image-driven textural features had to rely on standard and validated data such as UPDRS and best available date of first symptom/diagnosis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In AD, classification accuracy in large-scale studies (for example, n > 500) converges on ~90%, but in other areas, such as autism and ADHD, large-scale studies show substantially lower accuracy. Though there are some exceptional large-scale studies with very high accuracy 39,6971 , none of these models have been prospectively tested on independent data and thus await independent validation.…”
Section: A Critical Evaluation Of Clinical Predictive Modelingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recent advances in the areas of machine learning and data-driven analysis have demonstrated the utility of different brain imaging modalities for automated diagnosis of PD. These studies have utilized a host of techniques that include supervised predictive models such as support vector machines (SVMs) (Abos et al, 2017;Amoroso, La Rocca, Monaco, Bellotti, & Tangaro, 2018;Cherubini, Morelli, et al, 2014;Cherubini, Nistico, et al, 2014;Huppertz et al, 2016;Rana et al, 2015;Salvatore et al, 2014) as well as unsupervised models such as self-organizing maps (Peran et al, 2018;Singh & Samavedham, 2015) on data acquired from morphological T1 weighted MRI, functional MRI, diffusion tensor imaging, SPECT, etc. (Adeli et al, 2016;Ariz et al, 2018) and have reported high but variable accuracies.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%