Home › Research › Getting a diagnosis
Neuropsychological tests and machine learning: identifying predictors of MCI and dementia progression
Carlotta Cazzolli, Marco Chierici, Monica Dallabona, Chiara Guella, Giuseppe Jurman. Aging Clinical and Experimental Research, 2025-03-12
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
The tests qualitatively and statistically associated to a cognitive decline are MMSE, FAB, BSTR, AM, and VSF, of which at least three were considered the most informative also by machine learning. 73% average accuracy was obtained in the diagnosis prediction on three subsets of original and external data. Detecting the most informative tests could reduce the visits' time and prevent the cognitive assessment from being biased by external factors. Machine learning models' prediction represents a useful baseline for the clinician's actual diagnosis and a reliable insight into the future development of the patient's cognitive status.
Key findings
- The tests qualitatively and statistically associated to a cognitive decline are MMSE, FAB, BSTR, AM, and VSF, of which at least three were considered the most informative also by machine learning. 73% average accuracy was obtained in the diagnosis prediction on three subsets of original and external data.
- Detecting the most informative tests could reduce the visits' time and prevent the cognitive assessment from being biased by external factors.
- Machine learning models' prediction represents a useful baseline for the clinician's actual diagnosis and a reliable insight into the future development of the patient's cognitive status.
Why it matters
This study found that certain neuropsychological tests were associated with cognitive decline and that machine learning models predicted diagnosis with 73% average accuracy. It is about identifying informative tests and predicting progression, not about treating, curing or preventing Alzheimer's disease.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Getting a diagnosis →
Study details
- Participants281
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 40/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Aging Clinical and Experimental Research) |
| Journal's citation record | 1 / 4 | Aging Clinical and Experimental Research: journal h-index 125 (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 | 4 / 5 | 2025 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 281 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 | 1 / 7 | Cited 4 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 1 / 5 | 1.3 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025 |
| Impact for its field and year | 2 / 6 | Cited 2.5× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 0 / 6 | No other study in this library cites it |
| Still being cited | 1 / 4 | Cited 4 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 2 / 4 | Last-listed author Giuseppe Jurman: h-index 40 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 0 / 3 | Humanitas University: institution h-index 323 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 1 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 3 institution(s) in 1 country |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 40072711) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Total | 40 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
- DOI: 10.1007/s40520-025-02962-4
- PubMed: 40072711
- Original source →
- Free full text: Aging Clinical and Experimental Research →
Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).
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. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Cazzolli, C., Chierici, M., Dallabona, M., Guella, C., & Jurman, G. (2025). Neuropsychological tests and machine learning: identifying predictors of MCI and dementia progression. Aging Clinical and Experimental Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-025-02962-4
Vancouver
Cazzolli C, Chierici M, Dallabona M, Guella C, Jurman G. Neuropsychological tests and machine learning: identifying predictors of MCI and dementia progression. Aging Clinical and Experimental Research. 2025. doi:10.1007/s40520-025-02962-4. PMID: 40072711.
BibTeX
@article{cazzolli2025-40072711,
author = {Cazzolli, Carlotta and Chierici, Marco and Dallabona, Monica and Guella, Chiara and Jurman, Giuseppe},
title = {{Neuropsychological tests and machine learning: identifying predictors of MCI and dementia progression}},
journal = {Aging Clinical and Experimental Research},
year = {2025},
doi = {10.1007/s40520-025-02962-4},
pmid = {40072711},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-025-02962-4}
}
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.