↓ Skip to main content

Cross-View Neuroimage Pattern Analysis in Alzheimer's Disease Staging

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, February 2016
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)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Cross-View Neuroimage Pattern Analysis in Alzheimer's Disease Staging
Published in
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, February 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnagi.2016.00023
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sidong Liu, Weidong Cai, Sonia Pujol, Ron Kikinis, Dagan D. Feng, the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative

Abstract

The research on staging of pre-symptomatic and prodromal phase of neurological disorders, e.g., Alzheimer's disease (AD), is essential for prevention of dementia. New strategies for AD staging with a focus on early detection, are demanded to optimize potential efficacy of disease-modifying therapies that can halt or slow the disease progression. Recently, neuroimaging are increasingly used as additional research-based markers to detect AD onset and predict conversion of MCI and normal control (NC) to AD. Researchers have proposed a variety of neuroimaging biomarkers to characterize the patterns of the pathology of AD and MCI, and suggested that multi-view neuroimaging biomarkers could lead to better performance than single-view biomarkers in AD staging. However, it is still unclear what leads to such synergy and how to preserve or maximize. In an attempt to answer these questions, we proposed a cross-view pattern analysis framework for investigating the synergy between different neuroimaging biomarkers. We quantitatively analyzed nine types of biomarkers derived from FDG-PET and T1-MRI, and evaluated their performance in a task of classifying AD, MCI, and NC subjects obtained from the ADNI baseline cohort. The experiment results showed that these biomarkers could depict the pathology of AD from different perspectives, and output distinct patterns that are significantly associated with the disease progression. Most importantly, we found that these features could be separated into clusters, each depicting a particular aspect; and the inter-cluster features could always achieve better performance than the intra-cluster features in AD staging.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 41 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 19%
Student > Master 5 12%
Lecturer 3 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 8 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 16%
Neuroscience 6 14%
Psychology 5 12%
Computer Science 2 5%
Physics and Astronomy 2 5%
Other 11 26%
Unknown 10 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 11 March 2016.
All research outputs
#4,185,426
of 22,856,968 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#1,999
of 4,802 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,623
of 298,745 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#43
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,856,968 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,802 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 298,745 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 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.