Recommendations for reporting findings from analyses using artificial intelligence and machine learning in the <i>Journal of Alzheimer's Disease</i>

We propose five recommendations to make AI-based research studies more suitable for a clinical readership. First, authors should justify the added value of complex and potentially more opaque AI approaches. Second, rigorous description of input data, diagnostic criteria, and preprocessing is essential to avoid biased or clinically irrelevant outcomes. Third, benchmarking against clinically relevant performance thresholds should be established a priori. Fourth, method sections should combine an accessible lay summary with detailed technical supplement. Fifth, model explainability is encouraged to mitigate opacity. These recommendations aim to support AI research that is methodologically robust and interpretable for AD researchers.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Alzheimer s Disease
Published
2026-01-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/13872877251413701
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Recommendations for reporting findings from analyses using artificial intelligence and machine learning in the Journal of Alzheimer's Disease

Stefan Teipel, August König, Anna-Katharine Brem, Martin Dyrba et al.
Journal of Alzheimer s Disease
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
article

Recommendations for reporting findings from analyses using artificial intelligence and machine learning in the Journal of Alzheimer's Disease

Stefan Teipel, August König, Anna-Katharine Brem, Martin Dyrba, Paula I. Moreira, James Cole, George Perry
article en

Abstract

We propose five recommendations to make AI-based research studies more suitable for a clinical readership. First, authors should justify the added value of complex and potentially more opaque AI approaches. Second, rigorous description of input data, diagnostic criteria, and preprocessing is essential to avoid biased or clinically irrelevant outcomes. Third, benchmarking against clinically relevant performance thresholds should be established a priori. Fourth, method sections should combine an accessible lay summary with detailed technical supplement. Fifth, model explainability is encouraged to mitigate opacity. These recommendations aim to support AI research that is methodologically robust and interpretable for AD researchers.

Journal of Alzheimer s DiseaseVol. 110(1)
University of Bern (CH), King's College London (GB), Université Côte d'Azur (FR), University Hospital of Bern (CH), German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DE), Karolinska Institutet (SE), Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nice (FR), Universidad Fernando Pessoa Canarias (ES), NIHR Queen Square Dementia Biomedical Research Unit (GB), Cognition Behaviour Technology (FR), University College London (GB), The University of Texas at San Antonio (US), University of Coimbra (PT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 90%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Recommendations for reporting findings from analyses using artificial intelligence and machine learning in the <i>Journal of Alzheimer's Disease</i> — Stefan Teipel, August König, et al. · Journal of Alzheimer s Disease (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS