Mind the gap: Performance metric evaluation in brain-age prediction.

Journal: Human brain mapping
Published Date:

Abstract

Estimating age based on neuroimaging-derived data has become a popular approach to developing markers for brain integrity and health. While a variety of machine-learning algorithms can provide accurate predictions of age based on brain characteristics, there is significant variation in model accuracy reported across studies. We predicted age in two population-based datasets, and assessed the effects of age range, sample size and age-bias correction on the model performance metrics Pearson's correlation coefficient (r), the coefficient of determination (R ), Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) and Mean Absolute Error (MAE). The results showed that these metrics vary considerably depending on cohort age range; r and R values are lower when measured in samples with a narrower age range. RMSE and MAE are also lower in samples with a narrower age range due to smaller errors/brain age delta values when predictions are closer to the mean age of the group. Across subsets with different age ranges, performance metrics improve with increasing sample size. Performance metrics further vary depending on prediction variance as well as mean age difference between training and test sets, and age-bias corrected metrics indicate high accuracy-also for models showing poor initial performance. In conclusion, performance metrics used for evaluating age prediction models depend on cohort and study-specific data characteristics, and cannot be directly compared across different studies. Since age-bias corrected metrics generally indicate high accuracy, even for poorly performing models, inspection of uncorrected model results provides important information about underlying model attributes such as prediction variance.

Authors

  • Ann-Marie G de Lange
    LREN, Centre for Research in Neurosciences, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV) and University of Lausanne, Lausanne.
  • Melis Anatürk
    Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford.
  • Jaroslav Rokicki
    NORMENT, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, & Division of Mental Health and Addiction, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
  • Laura K M Han
    Department of Psychiatry, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Vrije Universiteit and GGZ inGeest, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Katja Franke
    Structural Brain Mapping Group, Department of Neurology, Jena University Hospital, Jena, Germany.
  • Dag Alnaes
    NORMENT, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, & Division of Mental Health and Addiction, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
  • Klaus P Ebmeier
    Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford.
  • Bogdan Draganski
    LREN, Centre for Research in Neurosciences, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV) and University of Lausanne, Lausanne.
  • Tobias Kaufmann
    NORMENT, Division of Mental Health and Addiction, Oslo University Hospital & Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
  • Lars T Westlye
    CoE NORMENT, KG Jebsen Centre for Psychosis Research, Division of Mental Health and Addiction, Oslo University Hospital & Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
  • Tim Hahn
  • James H Cole
    Computational, Clinical, and Cognitive Neuroimaging Laboratory, Department of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.