SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article
Front. Neurol.
Sec. Neurotechnology
Volume 16 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fneur.2025.1641548
This article is part of the Research TopicBasic NeurotechnologyView all articles
Meta Analysis of the Diagnostic Efficacy of Transformer-Based Multimodal Fusion Deep Learning Models in Early Alzheimer's Disease
Provisionally accepted- Xianyang Hospital of Yan 'an University, Xianyang, China
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
This study aims to systematically evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of Transformer-based multimodal fusion deep learning models in early Alzheimer's disease (AD) through a Meta-analysis, providing a scientific basis for clinical applications. Following PRISMA guidelines, databases such as PubMed and Web of Science were searched, and 20 eligible clinical studies (2022-2025) involving 12,897 participants were included. Study quality was assessed using the modified QUADAS-2 tool, statistical analyses were performed with Stata 16.0, effect sizes were pooled via random-effects models, and subgroup analyses, sensitivity analyses, and publication bias tests were conducted. Results showed that Transformer-based multimodal fusion models exhibited excellent overall diagnostic performance, with a pooled AUC of 0.924 (95% CI: 0.912–0.936), sensitivity of 0.887 (0.865–0.904), specificity of 0.892 (0.871–0.910), and accuracy of 0.879 (0.858–0.897), significantly outperforming traditional single-modality methods. Subgroup analyses revealed that: Three or more modalities achieved a higher AUC (0.935 vs. 0.908 for two modalities, P=0.012). Intermediate fusion strategies (feature-level, AUC=0.931) significantly outperformed early (0.905) and late (0.912) fusion (P<0.05 for both). Multicenter data improved AUC (0.930 vs. 0.918 for single-center, P=0.046), while sample size stratification (<200 vs. ≥200 cases) showed no significant difference (P=0.113). Hybrid Transformer models (Transformer +CNN) trended toward higher AUC (0.928 vs. pure Transformer 0.917, P=0.068) but did not reach statistical significance. Notable studies included Khan et al.'s (2024) Dual-3DM³AD model (AUC=0.945 for AD vs. MCI) and Gao et al.'s (2023) generative network (AUC=0.912 under data loss), validating model robustness and feature complementarity. Sensitivity analysis confirmed stable results (AUC range: 0.920–0.928), and Egger's test (P=0.217) and funnel plot symmetry indicated no significant publication bias. Limitations included a high proportion of single-center data and insufficient model interpretability. Future research should focus on multicenter data integration, interpretable module development, and lightweight design to facilitate clinical translation. Transformer-based multimodal fusion models demonstrate exceptional efficacy in early AD diagnosis, with multimodal integration, feature-level fusion, and multicenter data application as key advantages. They hold promise as core tools for AD "early diagnosis and treatment" but require further optimization for cross-cohort generalization and clinical interpretability.
Keywords: meta analysis, transformer, deep learning, Alzheimer's disease, early diagnosis
Received: 05 Jun 2025; Accepted: 06 Oct 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Guo, Yang, Zhang, Lv and Zhao. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Xiongfei Zhao, zhaoxiongfei1973@sina.com
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.