TABLE 3

Discriminant Models

NA vs. (converting MCI+AD)Nonconverting MCI vs. (converting MCI+AD)
1 component4 components1 component4 components
ParameterExp.CIExp.CIExp.CIExp.CI
Model performance
 Sensitivity75.870.1–82.790.185.9–95.381.975.7–88.683.277.2–89.2
 Specificity83.372.1–94.688.178.3–97.977.862.1–93.585.271.8–98.6
 Accuracy77.571.6–83.490.085.8–94.381.375.5–87.083.578.0–89.0
 ROC AUC85.579.3–90.693.188.0–95.787.280.4–92.789.483.3–93.3
Within-group classificationNAADNAADNCADNCAD
 NA81.019.092.97.181.0*19.0*88.1*11.9*
 Nonconverters66.7*33.3*88.2*14.8*85.214.896.33.7
 Early MCI29.770.318.981.135.164.929.770.3
 Late MCI27.672.419.081.029.370.720.779.3
 AD13.087.014.885.213.087.014.885.2
  • * Not involved in training step.

  • Exp. = expected value; CI = confidence interval; ROC AUC = area under receiver-operating-characteristic curve; NA = normal aging.

  • Discriminant models are as evaluated by leave-one-out cross-validation considering partitions into two contrasting groups: NA vs. all AD and nonconverting MCI vs. all AD. Linear discrimination was applied to best discriminant region (1 component), which in both cases was left temporal cortex. Four-component models were based on SVM method and involved sensorimotor cortex, left temporal cortex, posterior cingulate cortex/precuneus, and sylvian temporal cortex. Two-level discrimination as obtained by each model for each group is reported (within-group classification). Data are percentages.