Accumulating evidence suggests that Alzheimer's disease (AD) is heterogenous and can be classified into several subtypes. Here, we propose a robust subtyping method for AD based on cortical atrophy patterns and graph theory. We calculated similarities between subjects in their atrophy patterns throughout the whole brain, and clustered subjects with similar atrophy patterns using the Louvain method for modular organization extraction. We applied our method to AD patients recruited at Samsung Medical Center and externally validated our method by using the AD Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) dataset. Our method categorized very mild AD into three clinically distinct subtypes with high reproducibility (>90%); the parietal-predominant (P), medial temporal-predominant (MT), and diffuse (D) atrophy subtype. The P subtype showed the worst clinical presentation throughout the cognitive domains, while the MT and D subtypes exhibited relatively mild presentation. The MT subtype revealed more impaired language and executive function compared to the D subtype.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 17 March 2017.
All research outputs
#3,207,504
of 23,306,612 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#27,384
of 125,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,500
of 308,688 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#1,083
of 4,598 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,306,612 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 125,968 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 308,688 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,598 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
