4.7 Article

Deformation based feature selection for Computer Aided Diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease

期刊

EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS
卷 40, 期 5, 页码 1619-1628

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2012.09.009

关键词

Alzheimer's disease; Suppor Vector Machines; Feature selection; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Computed Aided Diagnosis

资金

  1. Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovacion of the Spanish Government
  2. Basque Government funds for the research group and predoctoral grant

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Deformation-based Morphometry (DBM) allows detection of significant morphological differences of brain anatomy, such as those related to brain atrophy in Alzheimer's Disease (AD). DBM process is as follows: First, performs the non-linear registration of a subject's structural MRI volume to a reference template. Second, computes scalar measures of the registration's deformation field. Third, performs across volume statistical group analysis of these scalar measures to detect effects. In this paper we use the scalar deformation measures for Computer Aided Diagnosis (CAD) systems for AD. Specifically this paper deals with feature extraction methods over five such scalar measures. We evaluate three supervised feature selection methods based on voxel site significance measures given by Pearson correlation, Bhattacharyya distance and Welch's t-test, respectively. The CAD system discriminating between healthy control subjects (HC) and AD patients consists of a Support Vector Machine (SVM) classifier trained on the DBM selected features. The paper reports experimental results on structural MRI data from the cross-sectional OASIS database. Average 10-fold cross-validation classification results are comparable or improve the state-of-the-art results of other approaches performing CAD from structural MRI data. Localization in the brain of the most discriminant deformation voxel sites is in agreement with findings reported in the literature. (C) 2012 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据