PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Ciampi, Antonio
AU  - Rouette, Julie
AU  - Pellegrini, Fabio
AU  - Simoneau, Gabrielle
AU  - Caba, Bastien
AU  - Gafson, Arie
AU  - de Moor, Carl
AU  - Belachew, Shibeshih
TI  - The Use of Machine Learning Methods in Neurodegenerative Disease Research: A Scoping Review
AID  - 10.1101/2023.07.31.23293414
DP  - 2023 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2023.07.31.23293414
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/07/31/2023.07.31.23293414.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/07/31/2023.07.31.23293414.full
AB  - Machine learning (ML) methods are increasingly used in clinical research, but their extent is complex and largely unknown in the field of neurodegenerative diseases (ND). This scoping review describes state-of-the-art ML in ND research using MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase (Ovid), Central (Cochrane), and Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Xplore. Included articles, published between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2020, used patient data on Alzheimer’s disease, multiple sclerosis, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease, or Huntington’s disease that employed ML methods during primary analysis. One reviewer screened citations for inclusion; 5 conducted data extraction. For each article, we abstracted the type of ND; publication year; sample size; ML algorithm data type; primary clinical goal (disease diagnosis/prognosis/prediction of treatment effect); and ML method type. Quantitative and qualitative syntheses of the results were conducted. After screening 4,471 citations and searching 1,677 full-text articles, 1,485 articles were included. The number of articles using ML methods in ND research increased from 172 in 2016 to 490 in 2020, with most of those in Alzheimer’s disease. The most common data type was imaging data (46.9% of articles), followed by functional (20.6%), clinical (14.2%), biospecimen (6.2%), genetic (5.9%), electrophysiological (5.1%), and molecular (1.1%). Overall, 68.5% of imaging data studies were in Alzheimer’s disease and 75.9% of functional data studies were in Parkinson’s disease. Disease diagnosis was the most common clinical aim in studies using ML methods (73.5%), followed by disease prognosis (21.4%) and prediction of treatment effect (13.5%). We extracted 2,734 ML methods, with support vector machine (n=651, 23.8%), random forest (n=310, 11.3%), and convolutional neural network (n=166, 6.1%) representing the majority. Finally, we identified 322 unique ML methods. There are opportunities for additional research using ML methods for disease prognosis and prediction of treatment effect. Addressing these utilization gaps will be important in future studies.Author Summary Few state-of-the-art scientific updates have been targeted for broader readerships without indulging in technical jargon. We have learned a lot from Judea Pearl on how to put things into context and make them clear. In this review paper, we identify machine learning methods used in the realm of neurodegenerative diseases and describe how the use of these methods can be enhanced in neurodegenerative disease research.Competing Interest StatementJ. Rouette received consulting fees from Biogen A. Ciampi received consulting fees from Biogen F. Pellegrini, B. Caba, A. Gafson, and S. Belachew are employees of and hold stock/stock options in Biogen C. de Moor and G Simoneau were, at the time of manuscript development, employees of and held stock/stock options in Biogen.Funding StatementThis study was supported by Biogen.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesN/A