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 51 out of 100. Digital health tools

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Alzheimer's disease is the most common form of dementia and the fifth-leading cause of death among people over the age of 65. In addition, based on official records, cases of death from Alzheimer's disease have increased significantly. Hence, early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease can increase patients' survival rates. Machine learning methods on magnetic resonance imaging have been used in the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease to accelerate the diagnosis process and assist physicians. However, in conventional machine learning techniques, using handcrafted feature extraction methods on MRI images is complicated, requiring the involvement of an expert user. Therefore, implementing deep learning as an automatic feature extraction method could minimize the need for feature extraction and automate the process. In this study, we propose a pre-trained CNN deep learning model ResNet50 as an automatic feature extraction method for diagnosing Alzheimer's disease using MRI images. Then, the performance of a CNN with conventional Softmax, SVM, and RF evaluated using different metric measures such as accuracy. The result showed that our model outperformed other state-of-the-art models by achieving the higher accuracy, with an accuracy range of 85.7% to 99% for models with MRI ADNI dataset.

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

APA 7th

AlSaeed, D., & Omar, S. F. (2022). Brain MRI Analysis for Alzheimer's Disease Diagnosis Using CNN-Based Feature Extraction and Machine Learning. Sensors (Basel, Switzerland). https://doi.org/10.3390/s22082911

Vancouver

AlSaeed D, Omar SF. Brain MRI Analysis for Alzheimer's Disease Diagnosis Using CNN-Based Feature Extraction and Machine Learning. Sensors (Basel, Switzerland). 2022. doi:10.3390/s22082911. PMID: 35458896.

BibTeX

@article{alsaeed2022-35458896,
  author  = {AlSaeed, D. and Omar, S. F.},
  title   = {{Brain MRI Analysis for Alzheimer's Disease Diagnosis Using CNN-Based Feature Extraction and Machine Learning}},
  journal = {Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)},
  year    = {2022},
  doi     = {10.3390/s22082911},
  pmid    = {35458896},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.3390/s22082911}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Why it matters

This study used a pre-trained CNN model to automatically extract features from MRI images for diagnosing Alzheimer's disease, then evaluated classification with Softmax, SVM, and random forest. The model achieved accuracy ranging from 85.7% to 99% on the ADNI dataset.

Study details

How this study scored 51/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record 3 of 4; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 3 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 2 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 5 of 7; Citations per year 4 of 5; Impact for its field and year 5 of 6; Cited by studies here 2 of 6; Still being cited 3 of 4; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record 0 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 0 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. 49 of the 96 points it could be judged on, which is 51 of 100. Total 51 of 100.49 of the 96 points we could judge = 51 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on senior author's track record, so that was left out: it earned 49 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 51 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Sensors (Basel, Switzerland))
Journal's citation record 3 / 4 Sensors: journal h-index 338 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
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 2022 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 0 / 4 Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported 2 / 3 Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
Studied in people 0 / 3 Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited 5 / 7 Cited 182 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 4 / 5 30.3 citations a year over 6 year(s) since 2022
Impact for its field and year 5 / 6 Cited 22.3× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 2 / 6 Cited by 3 other studies in this library
Still being cited 3 / 4 Cited 150 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record — / 4 OpenAlex's profile for last-listed author Samar Fouad Omar holds only 1 work(s), too few to judge a track record — left out of this score
Institution's track record 0 / 3 King Saud University: institution h-index 486 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 0 / 3 OpenAlex lists 1 institution(s) in 1 country — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete)
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 35458896)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 49 / 96 Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 49 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 51 out of 100.
Total 51 / 100 —

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

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.

Later studies that cite this one

3 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references.

Related studies in Digital health tools

Also tagged “classification”

835 studies in the library carry the topic tag “classification”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 835 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Digital health tools

See all studies in Digital health tools →