Artificial Intelligence, speech and language processing approaches to monitoring Alzheimer's Disease: a systematic review
October 12, 2020 Β· Declared Dead Β· π Journal of Alzheimer's Disease
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Sofia de la Fuente Garcia, Craig Ritchie, Saturnino Luz
arXiv ID
2010.06047
Category
cs.AI: Artificial Intelligence
Cross-listed
cs.CL,
eess.AS
Citations
194
Venue
Journal of Alzheimer's Disease
Last Checked
2 months ago
Abstract
Language is a valuable source of clinical information in Alzheimer's Disease, as it declines concurrently with neurodegeneration. Consequently, speech and language data have been extensively studied in connection with its diagnosis. This paper summarises current findings on the use of artificial intelligence, speech and language processing to predict cognitive decline in the context of Alzheimer's Disease, detailing current research procedures, highlighting their limitations and suggesting strategies to address them. We conducted a systematic review of original research between 2000 and 2019, registered in PROSPERO (reference CRD42018116606). An interdisciplinary search covered six databases on engineering (ACM and IEEE), psychology (PsycINFO), medicine (PubMed and Embase) and Web of Science. Bibliographies of relevant papers were screened until December 2019. From 3,654 search results 51 articles were selected against the eligibility criteria. Four tables summarise their findings: study details (aim, population, interventions, comparisons, methods and outcomes), data details (size, type, modalities, annotation, balance, availability and language of study), methodology (pre-processing, feature generation, machine learning, evaluation and results) and clinical applicability (research implications, clinical potential, risk of bias and strengths/limitations). While promising results are reported across nearly all 51 studies, very few have been implemented in clinical research or practice. We concluded that the main limitations of the field are poor standardisation, limited comparability of results, and a degree of disconnect between study aims and clinical applications. Attempts to close these gaps should support translation of future research into clinical practice.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Artificial Intelligence
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, Taxonomies, Opportunities and Challenges toward Responsible AI
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Addressing Function Approximation Error in Actor-Critic Methods
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciences
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Challenge
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Complex Embeddings for Simple Link Prediction
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Language Models are Few-Shot Learners
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Library
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted