↓ Skip to main content

Random Forests Based Group Importance Scores and Their Statistical Interpretation: Application for Alzheimer's Disease

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in 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 (80th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
33 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
Random Forests Based Group Importance Scores and Their Statistical Interpretation: Application for Alzheimer's Disease
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, June 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2018.00411
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marie Wehenkel, Antonio Sutera, Christine Bastin, Pierre Geurts, Christophe Phillips

Abstract

Machine learning approaches have been increasingly used in the neuroimaging field for the design of computer-aided diagnosis systems. In this paper, we focus on the ability of these methods to provide interpretable information about the brain regions that are the most informative about the disease or condition of interest. In particular, we investigate the benefit of group-based, instead of voxel-based, analyses in the context of Random Forests. Assuming a prior division of the voxels into non overlapping groups (defined by an atlas), we propose several procedures to derive group importances from individual voxel importances derived from Random Forests models. We then adapt several permutation schemes to turn group importance scores into more interpretable statistical scores that allow to determine the truly relevant groups in the importance rankings. The good behaviour of these methods is first assessed on artificial datasets. Then, they are applied on our own dataset of FDG-PET scans to identify the brain regions involved in the prognosis of Alzheimer's disease.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 27%
Researcher 5 15%
Student > Master 4 12%
Student > Bachelor 1 3%
Professor 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 10 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 15%
Computer Science 4 12%
Engineering 2 6%
Neuroscience 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 6 18%
Unknown 13 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

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 20 July 2018.
All research outputs
#3,562,978
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#2,876
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,682
of 343,092 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#73
of 234 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,542 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 343,092 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 234 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 68% of its contemporaries.