↓ Skip to main content

The Diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder Based on the Random Neural Network Cluster

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
9 X users

Readers on

mendeley
70 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
The Diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder Based on the Random Neural Network Cluster
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2018.00257
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xia-an Bi, Yingchao Liu, Qin Jiang, Qing Shu, Qi Sun, Jianhua Dai

Abstract

As the autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is highly heritable, pervasive and prevalent, the clinical diagnosis of ASD is vital. In the existing literature, a single neural network (NN) is generally used to classify ASD patients from typical controls (TC) based on functional MRI data and the accuracy is not very high. Thus, the new method named as the random NN cluster, which consists of multiple NNs was proposed to classify ASD patients and TC in this article. Fifty ASD patients and 42 TC were selected from autism brain imaging data exchange (ABIDE) database. First, five different NNs were applied to build five types of random NN clusters. Second, the accuracies of the five types of random NN clusters were compared to select the highest one. The random Elman NN cluster had the highest accuracy, thus Elman NN was selected as the best base classifier. Then, we used the significant features between ASD patients and TC to find out abnormal brain regions which include the supplementary motor area, the median cingulate and paracingulate gyri, the fusiform gyrus (FG) and the insula (INS). The proposed method provides a new perspective to improve classification performance and it is meaningful for the diagnosis of ASD.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 19%
Researcher 10 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 14%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 3%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 20 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 14 20%
Neuroscience 11 16%
Psychology 7 10%
Engineering 5 7%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 21 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 10 December 2021.
All research outputs
#2,576,545
of 22,663,969 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#1,288
of 7,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,449
of 327,846 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#19
of 127 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,663,969 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,113 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 327,846 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 127 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.