Distribution Bias in Brain Age Research: Toward Age-Specific Interpretation of Brain Age Gaps.
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Konowski Maximilian, Ernsting Jan, Winter Nils R, Richter Maike, Fisch Lukas, Spanagel Jennifer, Barkhau Carlotta, Jansen Andreas, Nenadic Igor, Stein Frederike, Thomas-Odenthal Florian, Flinkenflügel Kira, Borgers Tiana, Goltermann Janik, Grotegerd Dominik, Meinert Susanne, Leehr Elisabeth J, Jamalabadi Hamidreza, Kircher Tilo, Dannlowski Udo, Jiang Xiaoyi, Opel Nils, Hahn Tim, Leenings Ramona, Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative, the Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration Neuroimaging Initiative, and the Australian Imaging, Biomarkers, and Lifestyle Flagship Study of Ageing
Аннотация
METHODS: Using Monte Carlo simulations with data from 9305 individuals and external validation in neuropsychiatric cohorts (1345 individuals), we trained 100 brain age models for each of the 4 differently age-skewed training distributions, respectively. For each model, we evaluated predictive performance, conducted standard group-level analyses for different neurodegenerative and psychiatric diseases, and evaluated the clinical utility of the prediction as an individual risk marker.
RESULTS: Training data age distribution significantly influenced model predictions, causing substantial fluctuations in predicted brain ages across the aging continuum. Statistical analyses revealed that these fluctuations impacted effect sizes and statistical significance across all diseases. Moreover, we found limited effectiveness of the brain age gap (BAG) as an individual risk marker and different levels of disease-associated brain age across the aging continuum.
CONCLUSIONS: Skewed training data age distributions significantly impact brain age model predictions and may compromise scientific results. Based on our findings, we want to raise awareness about distribution bias and propose agewise interpretation of BAGs as a practical solution for robust research and meaningful clinical application.