Original Research Article
Application of the PredictAD Software Tool to Predict Progression in Patients with Mild Cognitive ImpairmentSimonsen A.H.a · Mattila J.b · Hejl A.-M.a · Frederiksen K.S.a · Herukka S.-K.c,d · Hallikainen M.c · van Gils M.b · Lötjönen J.b · Soininen H.c,d · Waldemar G.a
aMemory Disorders Research Group, Department of Neurology, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark; bVTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Tampere, and cInstitute of Clinical Medicine-Neurology, University of Eastern Finland, Yliopistoranta 1C and dDepartment of Neurology, Kuopio University Hospital, Kuopio, Finland
Do you have an account?
- Rent for 48h to view
- Buy Cloud Access for unlimited viewing via different devices
- Synchronizing in the ReadCube Cloud
- Printing and saving restrictions apply
Rental: USD 8.50
Cloud: USD 20.00
Background: The PredictAD tool integrates heterogeneous data such as imaging, cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers and results from neuropsychological tests for compact visualization in an interactive user interface. This study investigated whether the software tool could assist physicians in the early diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. Methods: Baseline data from 140 patients with mild cognitive impairment were selected from the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Study. Three clinical raters classified patients into 6 categories of confidence in the prediction of early Alzheimer’s disease, in 4 phases of incremental data presentation using the software tool. A 5th phase was done with all available patient data presented on paper charts. Classifications by the clinical raters were compared to the clinical diagnoses made by the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative investigators. Results: A statistical significant trend (p < 0.05) towards better classification accuracy (from 62.6 to 70.0%) was found when using the PredictAD tool during the stepwise procedure. When the same data were presented on paper, classification accuracy of the raters dropped significantly from 70.0 to 63.2%. Conclusion: Best classification accuracy was achieved by the clinical raters when using the tool for decision support, suggesting that the tool can add value in diagnostic classification when large amounts of heterogeneous data are presented.
© 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel
Article / Publication Details
Copyright / Drug Dosage / DisclaimerCopyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.