Detection of Cognitive Impairment From eSAGE Metadata Using Machine Learning.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Ryoma Kawakami, Kathy D Wright, Douglas W Scharre, Xia Ning
{"title":"Detection of Cognitive Impairment From eSAGE Metadata Using Machine Learning.","authors":"Ryoma Kawakami, Kathy D Wright, Douglas W Scharre, Xia Ning","doi":"10.1097/WAD.0000000000000593","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Using the metadata collected in the digital version of the Self-Administered Gerocognitive Examination (eSAGE), we aim to improve the prediction of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia (DM) by applying machine learning methods.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>A total of 66 patients had a diagnosis of normal cognition (NC), MCI, or DM, and eSAGE scores and metadata were used. eSAGE scores and metadata were obtained. Each eSAGE question was scored and behavioral features (metadata) such as the time spent on each test page, drawing speed, and average stroke length were extracted for each patient. Logistic regression (LR) and gradient boosting models were trained using these features to detect cognitive impairment (CI). Performance was evaluated using 10-fold cross-validation, with accuracy, precision, recall, F1 score, and receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC) score as evaluation metrics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>LR with feature selection achieved an AUC of 89.51%, a recall of 87.56%, and an F1 of 85.07% using both behavioral and scoring. LR using scores and metadata also achieved an AUC of 84.00% in detecting MCI from NC, and an AUC of 98.12% in detecting DM from NC. Average stroke length was particularly useful for prediction and when combined with 4 other scoring features, LR achieved an even better AUC of 92.06% in detecting CI. The study shows that eSAGE scores and metadata are predictive of CI.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>eSAGE scores and metadata are predictive of CI. With machine learning methods, the metadata could be combined with scores to enable more accurate detection of CI.</p>","PeriodicalId":7679,"journal":{"name":"Alzheimer Disease & Associated Disorders","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alzheimer Disease & Associated Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/WAD.0000000000000593","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Using the metadata collected in the digital version of the Self-Administered Gerocognitive Examination (eSAGE), we aim to improve the prediction of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia (DM) by applying machine learning methods.

Patients and methods: A total of 66 patients had a diagnosis of normal cognition (NC), MCI, or DM, and eSAGE scores and metadata were used. eSAGE scores and metadata were obtained. Each eSAGE question was scored and behavioral features (metadata) such as the time spent on each test page, drawing speed, and average stroke length were extracted for each patient. Logistic regression (LR) and gradient boosting models were trained using these features to detect cognitive impairment (CI). Performance was evaluated using 10-fold cross-validation, with accuracy, precision, recall, F1 score, and receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC) score as evaluation metrics.

Results: LR with feature selection achieved an AUC of 89.51%, a recall of 87.56%, and an F1 of 85.07% using both behavioral and scoring. LR using scores and metadata also achieved an AUC of 84.00% in detecting MCI from NC, and an AUC of 98.12% in detecting DM from NC. Average stroke length was particularly useful for prediction and when combined with 4 other scoring features, LR achieved an even better AUC of 92.06% in detecting CI. The study shows that eSAGE scores and metadata are predictive of CI.

Conclusions: eSAGE scores and metadata are predictive of CI. With machine learning methods, the metadata could be combined with scores to enable more accurate detection of CI.

利用机器学习从 eSAGE 元数据中检测认知障碍。
研究目的利用自控老年认知检查(eSAGE)数字版中收集的元数据,我们旨在通过应用机器学习方法改进对轻度认知障碍(MCI)和痴呆(DM)的预测:共有66名患者被诊断为认知功能正常(NC)、MCI或DM,并使用了eSAGE评分和元数据。对每个 eSAGE 问题进行评分,并提取每位患者的行为特征(元数据),如在每个测试页面上花费的时间、绘画速度和平均笔画长度。利用这些特征对逻辑回归(LR)和梯度提升模型进行训练,以检测认知障碍(CI)。使用 10 倍交叉验证评估性能,以准确率、精确度、召回率、F1 分数和接收器操作特征曲线下面积 (AUC) 分数作为评价指标:使用特征选择的 LR 在行为和评分方面的 AUC 为 89.51%,召回率为 87.56%,F1 为 85.07%。使用评分和元数据的 LR 从 NC 检测 MCI 的 AUC 为 84.00%,从 NC 检测 DM 的 AUC 为 98.12%。平均卒中长度对预测特别有用,当与其他 4 个评分特征相结合时,LR 在检测 CI 方面取得了更好的 AUC,达到 92.06%。结论:eSAGE 评分和元数据可预测 CI。结论:eSAGE 评分和元数据可预测 CI。通过机器学习方法,元数据可与评分相结合,从而更准确地检测 CI。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
4.80%
发文量
88
期刊介绍: ​Alzheimer Disease & Associated Disorders is a peer-reviewed, multidisciplinary journal directed to an audience of clinicians and researchers, with primary emphasis on Alzheimer disease and associated disorders. The journal publishes original articles emphasizing research in humans including epidemiologic studies, clinical trials and experimental studies, studies of diagnosis and biomarkers, as well as research on the health of persons with dementia and their caregivers. The scientific portion of the journal is augmented by reviews of the current literature, concepts, conjectures, and hypotheses in dementia, brief reports, and letters to the editor.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信