↓ Skip to main content

Learning classification models of cognitive conditions from subtle behaviors in the digital Clock Drawing Test

Overview of attention for article published in Machine Learning, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#29 of 1,217)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
3 X users
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
118 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
190 Mendeley
Title
Learning classification models of cognitive conditions from subtle behaviors in the digital Clock Drawing Test
Published in
Machine Learning, October 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10994-015-5529-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

William Souillard-Mandar, Randall Davis, Cynthia Rudin, Rhoda Au, David J. Libon, Rodney Swenson, Catherine C. Price, Melissa Lamar, Dana L. Penney

Abstract

The Clock Drawing Test - a simple pencil and paper test - has been used for more than 50 years as a screening tool to differentiate normal individuals from those with cognitive impairment, and has proven useful in helping to diagnose cognitive dysfunction associated with neurological disorders such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, and other dementias and conditions. We have been administering the test using a digitizing ballpoint pen that reports its position with considerable spatial and temporal precision, making available far more detailed data about the subject's performance. Using pen stroke data from these drawings categorized by our software, we designed and computed a large collection of features, then explored the tradeoffs in performance and interpretability in classifiers built using a number of different subsets of these features and a variety of different machine learning techniques. We used traditional machine learning methods to build prediction models that achieve high accuracy. We operationalized widely used manual scoring systems so that we could use them as benchmarks for our models. We worked with clinicians to define guidelines for model interpretability, and constructed sparse linear models and rule lists designed to be as easy to use as scoring systems currently used by clinicians, but more accurate. While our models will require additional testing for validation, they offer the possibility of substantial improvement in detecting cognitive impairment earlier than currently possible, a development with considerable potential impact in practice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 190 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 2 1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 187 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 16%
Researcher 27 14%
Student > Master 17 9%
Student > Bachelor 16 8%
Lecturer 10 5%
Other 21 11%
Unknown 69 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 35 18%
Psychology 20 11%
Engineering 12 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 6%
Neuroscience 10 5%
Other 30 16%
Unknown 71 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 22 August 2023.
All research outputs
#1,528,008
of 25,389,116 outputs
Outputs from Machine Learning
#29
of 1,217 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,018
of 291,941 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Machine Learning
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,389,116 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,217 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 291,941 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.