SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Computational Approaches to Neurological Disorder Diagnosis: An In-Depth Review of Current Methods and Future Prospects

Curr Med Imaging · 2026-01-01

DOI: 10.2174/0115734056404224251026110800PMID: 41276980

Open accessreview-article; Review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

The rapid advancement of computational technologies has significantly transformed medical diagnostics, particularly in the realm of neurological disorders. This review provides a comprehensive analysis of the current computational approaches employed for the diagnosis of five major neurological disorders: Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, Epilepsy, Huntington's disease, and Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis. By evaluating 140 peer-reviewed studies, we explored a diverse array of diagnostic methods, including machine learning algorithms, neuroimaging techniques, and electrophysiological signal analysis. Our review highlights the efficacy, accuracy, and limitations of these diagnostic methods, emphasizing their role in early detection and differential diagnosis. Furthermore, we discuss the integration of multimodal data and the potential of emerging technologies such as deep learning and artificial intelligence to enhance diagnostic practices. We also address the current challenges in clinical implementation and propose future research directions to improve diagnostic precision and patient outcomes. This review aims to serve as a valuable resource for researchers, clinicians, and stakeholders in the field of neurodiagnostics, fostering a deeper understanding of computational methodologies that shape the future of neurological disorder diagnosis.

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.