Houston, We Have AI Problem! Quality Issues with Neuroimaging‐Based Artificial Intelligence in Parkinson's Disease: A Systematic Review

Author:

Dzialas Verena12ORCID,Doering Elena13ORCID,Eich Helena1,Strafella Antonio P.456,Vaillancourt David E.7,Simonyan Kristina89ORCID,van Eimeren Thilo110ORCID,

Affiliation:

1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital University of Cologne Cologne Germany

2. Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences University of Cologne Cologne Germany

3. German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE) Bonn Germany

4. Edmond J. Safra Parkinson Disease Program, Neurology Division, Krembil Brain Institute University Health Network Toronto Canada

5. Brain Health Imaging Centre, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health University of Toronto Toronto Canada

6. Temerty Faculty of Medicine University of Toronto Toronto Canada

7. Department of Applied Physiology and Kinesiology University of Florida Gainesville Florida USA

8. Department of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts Eye and Ear Boston Massachusetts USA

9. Department of Neurology Massachusetts General Hospital Boston Massachusetts USA

10. Department of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital University of Cologne Cologne Germany

Abstract

AbstractIn recent years, many neuroimaging studies have applied artificial intelligence (AI) to facilitate existing challenges in Parkinson's disease (PD) diagnosis, prognosis, and intervention. The aim of this systematic review was to provide an overview of neuroimaging‐based AI studies and to assess their methodological quality. A PubMed search yielded 810 studies, of which 244 that investigated the utility of neuroimaging‐based AI for PD diagnosis, prognosis, or intervention were included. We systematically categorized studies by outcomes and rated them with respect to five minimal quality criteria (MQC) pertaining to data splitting, data leakage, model complexity, performance reporting, and indication of biological plausibility. We found that the majority of studies aimed to distinguish PD patients from healthy controls (54%) or atypical parkinsonian syndromes (25%), whereas prognostic or interventional studies were sparse. Only 20% of evaluated studies passed all five MQC, with data leakage, non‐minimal model complexity, and reporting of biological plausibility as the primary factors for quality loss. Data leakage was associated with a significant inflation of accuracies. Very few studies employed external test sets (8%), where accuracy was significantly lower, and 19% of studies did not account for data imbalance. Adherence to MQC was low across all observed years and journal impact factors. This review outlines that AI has been applied to a wide variety of research questions pertaining to PD; however, the number of studies failing to pass the MQC is alarming. Therefore, we provide recommendations to enhance the interpretability, generalizability, and clinical utility of future AI applications using neuroimaging in PD. © 2024 The Author(s). Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

Funder

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft

Publisher

Wiley

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3