| Literature DB >> 35317343 |
Abstract
New technologies such as artificial intelligence, the internet of things, big data, and cloud computing have changed the overall society and economy, and the medical field particularly has tried to combine traditional examination methods and new technologies. The most remarkable field in medical research is the technology of predicting high dementia risk group using big data and artificial intelligence. This review introduces: (1) the definition, main concepts, and classification of machine learning and overall distinction of it from traditional statistical analysis models; and (2) the latest studies in mental science to detect dementia and predict high-risk groups in order to help competent researchers who are challenging medical artificial intelligence in the field of psychiatry. As a result of reviewing 4 studies that used machine learning to discriminate high-risk groups of dementia, various machine learning algorithms such as boosting model, artificial neural network, and random forest were used for predicting dementia. The development of machine learning algorithms will change primary care by applying advanced machine learning algorithms to detect high dementia risk groups in the future. ©The Author(s) 2022. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.Entities:
Keywords: Artificial intelligence; Clinical decision support system; Dementia; Machine learning; Mild cognitive impairment
Year: 2022 PMID: 35317343 PMCID: PMC8900592 DOI: 10.5498/wjp.v12.i2.204
Source DB: PubMed Journal: World J Psychiatry ISSN: 2220-3206
Figure 1Diagram for concepts of artificial intelligence, deep learning and machine learning. KNN: K-nearest neighbors; SVM: Support vector machine; RNN: Recurrent neural network; MLP: Multilayer perceptron; CNN: Convolutional neural network.
Figure 2The concept of two validations. A: The concept of hold-out validation; B: The concept of k-fold validation.
Summary of studies
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Bansal | Total of 416 subjects in cross-sectional data and 373 records in longitudinal data | Age, sex, education, socioeconomic status, mini-mental state examination, clinical dementia rating, atlas scaling factor, estimated total intracranial volume, and normalized whole-brain volume | J48, naive Bayes, random forest, multilayer perceptron | Classification accuracy; J48: 99.52%; Naive Bayes: 99.28%; Random forest: 92.55%; Multilayer perceptron: 96.88% |
| Bhagyashree | Total of 466 men and women, health and ageing, in South India | Consortium to establish a registry for Alzheimer’s disease, community screening instrument fordementia | Jrip, naive Bayes, random forest and J48, synthetic minority oversampling technique | Sensitivity; Word list recall (WLR) score lower than the population mean: 92.5%; cog-score/verbal fluency/WLR score lower than 0.5 SD lower than population mean: 85.1% |
| Zhu | Total of 5272 patients were analyzed. Normal cognition, mild cognitive impairment, very mild dementia | History of cognitive status, objective assessments including the clinical dementia rating, cognitive abilities screening instrument, and montreal cognitive assessment | Random forest, AdaBoost, LogitBoost, neural network, naive Bayes, and support vector machine (SVM) | Overall performance of the diagnostic models; Overall accuracy; Random forest: 0.86; AdaBoost: 0.83; LogitBoost: 0.81; Multilayer perceptron: 0.87; Naive Bayes: 0.87; SVM: 0.87 |
| Jammeh | Total of 26483 patients aged > 65 yr (National Health Service data) | Total of 15469 read codes, of which 4301 were diagnosis codes, 5028 process of care codes, and 6101 medication codes | SVM, naive Bayes, random forest, logistic regression | Naive Bayes classifier gave the best performance with a sensitivity and specificity of 84.47% and 86.67%; The area under the curve naive Bayes: 0.869 |
WLR: Word list recall; SVM: Support vector machine.