SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

PADG-Pred: Exploring Ensemble Approaches for Identifying Parkinson's Disease Associated Biomarkers Using Genomic Sequences Analysis.

IET Syst Biol · 2025-01-01

DOI: 10.1049/syb2.70006PMID: 40088455

Open accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; research-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), a degenerative disorder affecting the nervous system, manifests as unbalanced movements, stiffness, tremors, and coordination difficulties. Its cause, believed to involve genetic and environmental factors, underscores the critical need for prompt diagnosis and intervention to enhance treatment effectiveness. Despite the array of available diagnostics, their reliability remains a challenge. In this study, an innovative predictor PADG-Pred is proposed for the identification of Parkinson's associated biomarkers, utilising a genomic profile. In this study, a novel predictor, PADG-Pred, which not only identifies Parkinson's associated biomarkers through genomic profiling but also uniquely integrates multiple statistical feature extraction techniques with ensemble-based classification frameworks, thereby providing a more robust and interpretable decision-making process than existing tools. The processed dataset was utilised for feature extraction through multiple statistical moments and it is further involved in extensive training of the model using diverse classification techniques, encompassing Ensemble methods; XGBoost, Random Forest, Light Gradient Boosting Machine, Bagging, ExtraTrees, and Stacking. State-of-the-art validation procedures are applied, assessing key metrics such as specificity, accuracy, sensitivity/recall, and Mathew's correlation coefficient. The outcomes demonstrate the outstanding performance of PADG-RF, showcasing accuracy metrics consistently achieving ∼91% for the independent set, ∼94% for 5-fold, and ∼96% for 10-fold in cross-validation.

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.