Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Digital health tools

Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment

Objective We develop a deep learning framework based on the pre-trained Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) model using unstructured clinical notes from electronic health records (EHRs) to predict the risk of disease progression from Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) to Alzheimer's Disease (AD). Methods We identified 3657 patients diagnosed with MCI together with their progress notes from Northwestern Medicine Enterprise Data Warehouse (NMEDW) between 2000 and 2020. The progress notes no later than the first MCI diagnosis were used for the prediction. We first preprocessed the notes by deidentification, cleaning and splitting into sections, and then pre-trained a BERT model for AD (named AD-BERT) based on the publicly available Bio+Clinical BERT on the preprocessed notes. All sections of a patient were embedded into a vector representation by AD-BERT and then combined by global MaxPooling and a fully connected network to compute the probability of MCI-to-AD progression. For validation, we conducted a similar set of experiments on 2563 MCI patients identified at Weill Cornell Medicine (WCM) during the same timeframe. Results Compared with the 7 baseline models, the AD-BERT model achieved the best performance on both datasets, with Area Under receiver operating characteristic Curve (AUC) of 0.849 and F1 score of 0.440 on NMEDW dataset, and AUC of 0.883 and F1 score of 0.680 on WCM dataset. Conclusion The use of EHRs for AD-related research is promising, and AD-BERT shows superior predictive performance in modeling MCI-to-AD progression prediction. Our study demonstrates the utility of pre-trained language models and clinical notes in predicting MCI-to-AD progression, which could have important implications for improving early detection and intervention for AD.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 50/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 3 of 5; Sample size 3 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 29 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 50 of 100. Total 50 of 100.29 of the 58 points we could judge = 50 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 29 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 50 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of biomedical informatics)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 0 / 12 No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence 1 / 5 Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 3 / 5 2023 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 3 / 4 3,657 participants
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited — / 7 No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year — / 5 No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year — / 6 No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here — / 6 Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited — / 4 No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 37429512)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 29 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 29 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 50 out of 100.
Total 50 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Mao, C., Xu, J., Rasmussen, L., Li, Y., Adekkanattu, P., Pacheco, J., et al. (2023). AD-BERT: Using pre-trained language model to predict the progression from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer's disease. Journal of biomedical informatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2023.104442

Vancouver

Mao C, Xu J, Rasmussen L, Li Y, Adekkanattu P, Pacheco J, et al. AD-BERT: Using pre-trained language model to predict the progression from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer's disease. Journal of biomedical informatics. 2023. doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2023.104442. PMID: 37429512.

BibTeX

@article{mao2023-37429512,
  author  = {Mao, C. and Xu, J. and Rasmussen, L. and Li, Y. and Adekkanattu, P. and Pacheco, J. and Bonakdarpour, B. and Vassar, R. and others},
  title   = {{AD-BERT: Using pre-trained language model to predict the progression from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer's disease}},
  journal = {Journal of biomedical informatics},
  year    = {2023},
  doi     = {10.1016/j.jbi.2023.104442},
  pmid    = {37429512},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2023.104442}
}

Related studies in Digital health tools

Similar studies

More on Digital health tools

See all studies in Digital health tools →