Comparing machine learning and deep learning models to predict cognition progression in Parkinson's disease

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL Cts-Clinical and Translational Science Pub Date : 2024-11-08 DOI:10.1111/cts.70066
Edgar A. Bernal, Shu Yang, Konnor Herbst, Charles S. Venuto
{"title":"Comparing machine learning and deep learning models to predict cognition progression in Parkinson's disease","authors":"Edgar A. Bernal,&nbsp;Shu Yang,&nbsp;Konnor Herbst,&nbsp;Charles S. Venuto","doi":"10.1111/cts.70066","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Cognitive decline in Parkinson's disease (PD) varies widely. While models to predict cognitive progression exist, comparing traditional probabilistic models to deep learning methods remains understudied. This study compares sequential modeling techniques to identify cognitive progression in individuals with and without PD. Using data from the Parkinson's Progression Marker Initiative, shallow Markov, deep recurrent (long short-term memory [LSTM]), and nonrecurrent (temporal fusion transformer [TFT]) models were compared to predict cognitive status over time. Cognitive status was categorized into normal cognition (NC), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and dementia. Predictions were made annually for up to 3 years using clinical data, including demographics, cognitive assessments, PD severity, and medical history. Each approach was evaluated using inverse probability weighted (IPW-) F1 scores. An ensemble method combined outputs from the Markov, LSTM, and TFT models. The dataset included 917 individuals (53% PD; 30% at risk for PD; 17% Healthy Controls). The TFT model outperformed others across all annual periods (IPW-F1 = 0.468) compared to the Markov (IPW-F1 = 0.349) and LSTM (IPW-F1 = 0.414) models, with improved performance using an ensemble approach (IPW-F1 = 0.502). For MCI and dementia predictions, which were rarer occurrences compared to NC status (ratios: 50:8:1), the TFT model consistently outperformed competing models, achieving IPW-F1 scores of 0.496 and 0.533 for MCI and dementia, respectively. In conclusion, sequential deep learning models like TFT, which mitigate long-term memory loss and can interpret complex, high-dimensional data, perform best overall in predicting clinically important cognitive transitions. These methods should be further explored for predicting degenerative conditions.</p>","PeriodicalId":50610,"journal":{"name":"Cts-Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"17 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11544638/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cts-Clinical and Translational Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cts.70066","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Cognitive decline in Parkinson's disease (PD) varies widely. While models to predict cognitive progression exist, comparing traditional probabilistic models to deep learning methods remains understudied. This study compares sequential modeling techniques to identify cognitive progression in individuals with and without PD. Using data from the Parkinson's Progression Marker Initiative, shallow Markov, deep recurrent (long short-term memory [LSTM]), and nonrecurrent (temporal fusion transformer [TFT]) models were compared to predict cognitive status over time. Cognitive status was categorized into normal cognition (NC), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and dementia. Predictions were made annually for up to 3 years using clinical data, including demographics, cognitive assessments, PD severity, and medical history. Each approach was evaluated using inverse probability weighted (IPW-) F1 scores. An ensemble method combined outputs from the Markov, LSTM, and TFT models. The dataset included 917 individuals (53% PD; 30% at risk for PD; 17% Healthy Controls). The TFT model outperformed others across all annual periods (IPW-F1 = 0.468) compared to the Markov (IPW-F1 = 0.349) and LSTM (IPW-F1 = 0.414) models, with improved performance using an ensemble approach (IPW-F1 = 0.502). For MCI and dementia predictions, which were rarer occurrences compared to NC status (ratios: 50:8:1), the TFT model consistently outperformed competing models, achieving IPW-F1 scores of 0.496 and 0.533 for MCI and dementia, respectively. In conclusion, sequential deep learning models like TFT, which mitigate long-term memory loss and can interpret complex, high-dimensional data, perform best overall in predicting clinically important cognitive transitions. These methods should be further explored for predicting degenerative conditions.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
比较机器学习和深度学习模型,预测帕金森病的认知进展。
帕金森病(Parkinson's disease,PD)患者的认知能力下降程度差异很大。虽然存在预测认知进展的模型,但将传统概率模型与深度学习方法进行比较的研究仍然不足。本研究比较了序列建模技术,以识别帕金森病患者和非帕金森病患者的认知进展。利用帕金森病进展标记倡议(Parkinson's Progression Marker Initiative)的数据,比较了浅马尔科夫模型、深度递归模型(长短期记忆 [LSTM])和非递归模型(时序融合变换器 [TFT]),以预测随时间变化的认知状态。认知状态分为正常认知(NC)、轻度认知障碍(MCI)和痴呆。利用临床数据(包括人口统计学、认知评估、帕金森病严重程度和病史)每年进行一次长达 3 年的预测。每种方法都使用反概率加权(IPW-)F1 分数进行评估。一种集合方法综合了马尔可夫模型、LSTM 模型和 TFT 模型的输出结果。数据集包括 917 人(53% 患有帕金森病;30% 有帕金森病风险;17% 健康对照组)。与马尔科夫模型(IPW-F1 = 0.349)和 LSTM 模型(IPW-F1 = 0.414)相比,TFT 模型在所有年度期间的表现都优于其他模型(IPW-F1 = 0.468),而使用集合方法(IPW-F1 = 0.502)时的表现则更好。在 MCI 和痴呆症预测方面,与 NC 状态相比(比例:50:8:1),TFT 模型的表现始终优于其他竞争模型,在 MCI 和痴呆症方面的 IPW-F1 分数分别为 0.496 和 0.533。总之,像 TFT 这样的序列深度学习模型可以减轻长期记忆损失,并能解释复杂的高维数据,在预测临床上重要的认知转变方面总体表现最佳。应进一步探索这些方法,以预测退行性疾病。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Cts-Clinical and Translational Science
Cts-Clinical and Translational Science 医学-医学:研究与实验
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
2.60%
发文量
234
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical and Translational Science (CTS), an official journal of the American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, highlights original translational medicine research that helps bridge laboratory discoveries with the diagnosis and treatment of human disease. Translational medicine is a multi-faceted discipline with a focus on translational therapeutics. In a broad sense, translational medicine bridges across the discovery, development, regulation, and utilization spectrum. Research may appear as Full Articles, Brief Reports, Commentaries, Phase Forwards (clinical trials), Reviews, or Tutorials. CTS also includes invited didactic content that covers the connections between clinical pharmacology and translational medicine. Best-in-class methodologies and best practices are also welcomed as Tutorials. These additional features provide context for research articles and facilitate understanding for a wide array of individuals interested in clinical and translational science. CTS welcomes high quality, scientifically sound, original manuscripts focused on clinical pharmacology and translational science, including animal, in vitro, in silico, and clinical studies supporting the breadth of drug discovery, development, regulation and clinical use of both traditional drugs and innovative modalities.
期刊最新文献
Use cases of registry-based randomized controlled trials—A review of the registries' contributions and constraints Integrating real-world data and machine learning: A framework to assess covariate importance in real-world use of alternative intravenous dosing regimens for atezolizumab High-dose intranasal insulin in an adaptive dose-escalation study in healthy human participants Accumulation of endogenous Muse cells in the myocardium and its pathophysiological role in patients with fulminant myocarditis A randomized, placebo-controlled first-in-human study of oral TQS-168 in healthy volunteers: Assessment of safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and food effect
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1