SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

An interpretable model based on graph learning for diagnosis of Parkinson's disease with voice-related EEG.

NPJ Digit Med · 2024-01-05

DOI: 10.1038/s41746-023-00983-9PMID: 38182737

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Parkinson's disease (PD) exhibits significant clinical heterogeneity, presenting challenges in the identification of reliable electroencephalogram (EEG) biomarkers. Machine learning techniques have been integrated with resting-state EEG for PD diagnosis, but their practicality is constrained by the interpretable features and the stochastic nature of resting-state EEG. The present study proposes a novel and interpretable deep learning model, graph signal processing-graph convolutional networks (GSP-GCNs), using event-related EEG data obtained from a specific task involving vocal pitch regulation for PD diagnosis. By incorporating both local and global information from single-hop and multi-hop networks, our proposed GSP-GCNs models achieved an averaged classification accuracy of 90.2%, exhibiting a significant improvement of 9.5% over other deep learning models. Moreover, the interpretability analysis revealed discriminative distributions of large-scale EEG networks and topographic map of microstate MS5 learned by our models, primarily located in the left ventral premotor cortex, superior temporal gyrus, and Broca's area that are implicated in PD-related speech disorders, reflecting our GSP-GCN models' ability to provide interpretable insights identifying distinctive EEG biomarkers from large-scale networks. These findings demonstrate the potential of interpretable deep learning models coupled with voice-related EEG signals for distinguishing PD patients from healthy controls with accuracy and elucidating the underlying neurobiological mechanisms.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.