使用机器学习进行认知障碍筛查的神经心理测试。

IF 1.9 4区 生物学 Q4 BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
The Protein Journal Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2022-06-02 DOI:10.1080/23279095.2022.2078210
Chanda Simfukwe, SangYun Kim, Seong Soo An, Young Chul Youn
{"title":"使用机器学习进行认知障碍筛查的神经心理测试。","authors":"Chanda Simfukwe, SangYun Kim, Seong Soo An, Young Chul Youn","doi":"10.1080/23279095.2022.2078210","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Neuropsychological tests (NPTs) are widely used tools to evaluate cognitive functioning. The interpretation of these tests can be time-consuming and requires a specialized clinician. For this reason, we trained machine learning models that detect normal controls (NC), cognitive impairment (CI), and dementia among subjects.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>A total number of 14,927 subject datasets were collected from the formal neuropsychological assessments Seoul Neuropsychological Screening Battery (SNSB) by well-qualified neuropsychologists. The dataset included 44 NPTs of SNSB, age, education level, and diagnosis of each participant. The dataset was preprocessed and classified according to three different classes NC, CI, and dementia. We trained machine-learning with a supervised machine learning classifier algorithm support vector machine (SVM) 30 times with classification from scikit-learn (https://scikit-learn.org/stable/) to distinguish the prediction accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the models; NC <i>vs.</i> CI, NC <i>vs.</i> dementia, and NC <i>vs.</i> CI <i>vs.</i> dementia. Confusion matrixes were plotted using the testing dataset for each model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The trained model's 30 times mean accuracies for predicting cognitive states were as follows; NC <i>vs.</i> CI model was 88.61 ± 1.44%, NC <i>vs.</i> dementia model was 97.74 ± 5.78%, and NC <i>vs.</i> CI <i>vs.</i> dementia model was 83.85 ± 4.33%. NC <i>vs.</i> dementia showed the highest accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of 97.74 ± 5.78, 97.99 ± 5.78, and 96.08 ± 4.33% in predicting dementia among subjects, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Based on the results, the SVM algorithm is more appropriate in training models on an imbalanced dataset for a good prediction accuracy compared to natural network and logistic regression algorithms. The NC <i>vs.</i> dementia machine-learning trained model with SVM based on NPTs SNSB dataset could assist neuropsychologists in classifying the cognitive function of subjects.</p>","PeriodicalId":793,"journal":{"name":"The Protein Journal","volume":"35 1","pages":"825-830"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Neuropsychological test using machine learning for cognitive impairment screening.\",\"authors\":\"Chanda Simfukwe, SangYun Kim, Seong Soo An, Young Chul Youn\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/23279095.2022.2078210\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Neuropsychological tests (NPTs) are widely used tools to evaluate cognitive functioning. The interpretation of these tests can be time-consuming and requires a specialized clinician. For this reason, we trained machine learning models that detect normal controls (NC), cognitive impairment (CI), and dementia among subjects.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>A total number of 14,927 subject datasets were collected from the formal neuropsychological assessments Seoul Neuropsychological Screening Battery (SNSB) by well-qualified neuropsychologists. The dataset included 44 NPTs of SNSB, age, education level, and diagnosis of each participant. The dataset was preprocessed and classified according to three different classes NC, CI, and dementia. We trained machine-learning with a supervised machine learning classifier algorithm support vector machine (SVM) 30 times with classification from scikit-learn (https://scikit-learn.org/stable/) to distinguish the prediction accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the models; NC <i>vs.</i> CI, NC <i>vs.</i> dementia, and NC <i>vs.</i> CI <i>vs.</i> dementia. Confusion matrixes were plotted using the testing dataset for each model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The trained model's 30 times mean accuracies for predicting cognitive states were as follows; NC <i>vs.</i> CI model was 88.61 ± 1.44%, NC <i>vs.</i> dementia model was 97.74 ± 5.78%, and NC <i>vs.</i> CI <i>vs.</i> dementia model was 83.85 ± 4.33%. NC <i>vs.</i> dementia showed the highest accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of 97.74 ± 5.78, 97.99 ± 5.78, and 96.08 ± 4.33% in predicting dementia among subjects, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Based on the results, the SVM algorithm is more appropriate in training models on an imbalanced dataset for a good prediction accuracy compared to natural network and logistic regression algorithms. The NC <i>vs.</i> dementia machine-learning trained model with SVM based on NPTs SNSB dataset could assist neuropsychologists in classifying the cognitive function of subjects.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":793,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Protein Journal\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"825-830\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Protein Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2022.2078210\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/6/2 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Protein Journal","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2022.2078210","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/6/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的神经心理测试(npt)是广泛应用于认知功能评估的工具。这些测试的解释可能是耗时的,需要一个专业的临床医生。出于这个原因,我们训练了机器学习模型来检测受试者中的正常对照(NC)、认知障碍(CI)和痴呆。患者和方法由专业的神经心理学家从正式的神经心理学评估首尔神经心理学筛查组(SNSB)中收集了14927个受试者数据集。数据集包括44个SNSB的NPTs,每个参与者的年龄、教育程度和诊断。对数据集进行预处理,并根据NC、CI和痴呆三种不同的类别进行分类。通过scikit-learn (https://scikit-learn.org/stable/)的分类,我们使用有监督的机器学习分类器算法支持向量机(SVM)对机器学习进行了30次训练,以区分模型的预测准确性、灵敏度和特异性;NC与CI, NC与痴呆,NC与CI与痴呆。使用每个模型的测试数据集绘制混淆矩阵。结果训练后的模型预测认知状态的30倍平均准确率为:NC与CI模型比较为88.61±1.44%,NC与痴呆模型比较为97.74±5.78%,NC与CI与痴呆模型比较为83.85±4.33%。NC与痴呆预测的准确率、灵敏度和特异性最高,分别为97.74±5.78、97.99±5.78和96.08±4.33%。结论与自然网络和逻辑回归算法相比,SVM算法更适合在不平衡数据集上训练模型,具有较好的预测精度。基于NPTs SNSB数据集的SVM机器学习训练模型可以帮助神经心理学家对被试的认知功能进行分类。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Neuropsychological test using machine learning for cognitive impairment screening.

Objectives: Neuropsychological tests (NPTs) are widely used tools to evaluate cognitive functioning. The interpretation of these tests can be time-consuming and requires a specialized clinician. For this reason, we trained machine learning models that detect normal controls (NC), cognitive impairment (CI), and dementia among subjects.

Patients and methods: A total number of 14,927 subject datasets were collected from the formal neuropsychological assessments Seoul Neuropsychological Screening Battery (SNSB) by well-qualified neuropsychologists. The dataset included 44 NPTs of SNSB, age, education level, and diagnosis of each participant. The dataset was preprocessed and classified according to three different classes NC, CI, and dementia. We trained machine-learning with a supervised machine learning classifier algorithm support vector machine (SVM) 30 times with classification from scikit-learn (https://scikit-learn.org/stable/) to distinguish the prediction accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the models; NC vs. CI, NC vs. dementia, and NC vs. CI vs. dementia. Confusion matrixes were plotted using the testing dataset for each model.

Results: The trained model's 30 times mean accuracies for predicting cognitive states were as follows; NC vs. CI model was 88.61 ± 1.44%, NC vs. dementia model was 97.74 ± 5.78%, and NC vs. CI vs. dementia model was 83.85 ± 4.33%. NC vs. dementia showed the highest accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of 97.74 ± 5.78, 97.99 ± 5.78, and 96.08 ± 4.33% in predicting dementia among subjects, respectively.

Conclusion: Based on the results, the SVM algorithm is more appropriate in training models on an imbalanced dataset for a good prediction accuracy compared to natural network and logistic regression algorithms. The NC vs. dementia machine-learning trained model with SVM based on NPTs SNSB dataset could assist neuropsychologists in classifying the cognitive function of subjects.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
The Protein Journal
The Protein Journal 生物-生化与分子生物学
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
57
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: The Protein Journal (formerly the Journal of Protein Chemistry) publishes original research work on all aspects of proteins and peptides. These include studies concerned with covalent or three-dimensional structure determination (X-ray, NMR, cryoEM, EPR/ESR, optical methods, etc.), computational aspects of protein structure and function, protein folding and misfolding, assembly, genetics, evolution, proteomics, molecular biology, protein engineering, protein nanotechnology, protein purification and analysis and peptide synthesis, as well as the elucidation and interpretation of the molecular bases of biological activities of proteins and peptides. We accept original research papers, reviews, mini-reviews, hypotheses, opinion papers, 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