↓ Skip to main content

Combining SPECT and Quantitative EEG Analysis for the Automated Differential Diagnosis of Disorders with Amnestic Symptoms

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 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
Combining SPECT and Quantitative EEG Analysis for the Automated Differential Diagnosis of Disorders with Amnestic Symptoms
Published in
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, September 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnagi.2017.00290
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yvonne Höller, Arne C. Bathke, Andreas Uhl, Nicolas Strobl, Adelheid Lang, Jürgen Bergmann, Raffaele Nardone, Fabio Rossini, Harald Zauner, Margarita Kirschner, Amirhossein Jahanbekam, Eugen Trinka, Wolfgang Staffen

Abstract

Single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and Electroencephalography (EEG) have become established tools in routine diagnostics of dementia. We aimed to increase the diagnostic power by combining quantitative markers from SPECT and EEG for differential diagnosis of disorders with amnestic symptoms. We hypothesize that the combination of SPECT with measures of interaction (connectivity) in the EEG yields higher diagnostic accuracy than the single modalities. We examined 39 patients with Alzheimer's dementia (AD), 69 patients with depressive cognitive impairment (DCI), 71 patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI), and 41 patients with amnestic subjective cognitive complaints (aSCC). We calculated 14 measures of interaction from a standard clinical EEG-recording and derived graph-theoretic network measures. From regional brain perfusion measured by 99mTc-hexamethyl-propylene-aminoxime (HMPAO)-SPECT in 46 regions, we calculated relative cerebral perfusion in these patients. Patient groups were classified pairwise with a linear support vector machine. Classification was conducted separately for each biomarker, and then again for each EEG- biomarker combined with SPECT. Combination of SPECT with EEG-biomarkers outperformed single use of SPECT or EEG when classifying aSCC vs. AD (90%), aMCI vs. AD (70%), and AD vs. DCI (100%), while a selection of EEG measures performed best when classifying aSCC vs. aMCI (82%) and aMCI vs. DCI (90%). Only the contrast between aSCC and DCI did not result in above-chance classification accuracy (60%). In general, accuracies were higher when measures of interaction (i.e., connectivity measures) were applied directly than when graph-theoretical measures were derived. We suggest that quantitative analysis of EEG and machine-learning techniques can support differentiating AD, aMCI, aSCC, and DCC, especially when being combined with imaging methods such as SPECT. Quantitative analysis of EEG connectivity could become an integral part for early differential diagnosis of cognitive impairment.

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 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 91 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 12%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 9%
Other 6 7%
Other 14 15%
Unknown 30 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 15%
Psychology 9 10%
Neuroscience 7 8%
Engineering 5 5%
Computer Science 4 4%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 39 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 23 November 2018.
All research outputs
#13,253,704
of 23,460,553 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#2,871
of 4,922 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#149,774
of 316,556 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#43
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,460,553 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,922 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 316,556 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.