↓ Skip to main content

Structural brain changes versus self-report: machine-learning classification of chronic fatigue syndrome patients

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental Brain Research, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 Mendeley
Title
Structural brain changes versus self-report: machine-learning classification of chronic fatigue syndrome patients
Published in
Experimental Brain Research, May 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00221-018-5301-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Landrew S. Sevel, Jeff Boissoneault, Janelle E. Letzen, Michael E. Robinson, Roland Staud

Abstract

Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) is a disorder associated with fatigue, pain, and structural/functional abnormalities seen during magnetic resonance brain imaging (MRI). Therefore, we evaluated the performance of structural MRI (sMRI) abnormalities in the classification of CFS patients versus healthy controls and compared it to machine learning (ML) classification based upon self-report (SR). Participants included 18 CFS patients and 15 healthy controls (HC). All subjects underwent T1-weighted sMRI and provided visual analogue-scale ratings of fatigue, pain intensity, anxiety, depression, anger, and sleep quality. sMRI data were segmented using FreeSurfer and 61 regions based on functional and structural abnormalities previously reported in patients with CFS. Classification was performed in RapidMiner using a linear support vector machine and bootstrap optimism correction. We compared ML classifiers based on (1) 61 a priori sMRI regional estimates and (2) SR ratings. The sMRI model achieved 79.58% classification accuracy. The SR (accuracy = 95.95%) outperformed both sMRI models. Estimates from multiple brain areas related to cognition, emotion, and memory contributed strongly to group classification. This is the first ML-based group classification of CFS. Our findings suggest that sMRI abnormalities are useful for discriminating CFS patients from HC, but SR ratings remain most effective in classification tasks.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 78 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 17%
Researcher 9 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Student > Master 6 8%
Other 5 6%
Other 14 18%
Unknown 23 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 22%
Neuroscience 8 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 8%
Psychology 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Other 13 17%
Unknown 26 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 June 2018.
All research outputs
#4,614,160
of 25,654,806 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#368
of 3,412 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,764
of 345,106 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#8
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,806 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,412 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 345,106 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.