Skip to main content
. 2019 Nov 27;10:5409. doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-13163-9

Table 1.

Chronological age prediction accuracy for the considered methods.

Type Method Val MAE Val R2 Test MAE Test R2 No. I
(A) T1-weighted CNN 3.996 0.810 4.006 0.829 1815
Jacobian CNN 4.801 0.710 4.804 0.758 1815
Gray matter CNN 4.766 0.721 4.641 0.776 1815
White matter CNN 4.676 0.735 4.189 0.812 1815
(B) MV (T1 and JM) CNN 4.102 0.803 3.919 0.841 1815
MV (GM and WM) CNN 4.172 0.790 3.674 0.849 1815
MV (T1, JM, and GM) CNN 3.964 0.813 3.838 0.847 1815
MV (T1, JM, GM, and WM) CNN 3.845 0.849 3.584 0.849 1815
LRB (T1, JM, GM, and WM) CNN 3.581 0.847 3.388 0.872 1815
(C) SBM RR 5.268 0.689 5.176 0.697 1320
VBM GPR 4.278 0.781 4.317 0.766 1794
SM RR 4.898 0.722 4.937 0.728 1815
MV (SBM, VBM, and SM) GPR/RR 4.008 0.808 3.940 0.761 1246
LRB (SBM, VBM, and SM) GPR/RR 3.906 0.812 3.849 0.766 1246

(A) The best results are shown in bold. (B) The training/validation/test split is the same as for (A).

(C) The cross validation was performed using 10-fold cross validation. The SBM feature training/test split was 1056/264, the VBM feature training/test split was 1438/356, and the SM feature training/test split was 1469/346

(A) The performance of the CNNs that were trained using T1-weighted images, Jacobian maps, GM and WM segmented images. Training set (N=1171), validation set (N=298), and test set (N=346). (B) The performance when combining CNN predictions. (C) The results of the best methods trained on SBM, VBM and similarity matrix features

CV cross validation, GM gray matter, I images, JM Jacobian map, LRB linear regression blender, MV majority voting, MAE mean absolute error, RR ridge regression, SM similarity matrix, SBM surface-based morphometry, val validation, VBM voxel-based morphometry, WM white matter