Development and validation of a risk calculator for major mood disorders among the offspring of bipolar parents using information collected in routine clinical practice
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Family history is a significant risk factor for bipolar disorders (BD), but the magnitude of risk varies considerably between individuals within and across families. Accurate risk estimation may increase motivation to reduce modifiable risk exposures and identify individuals appropriate for monitoring over the peak risk period. Our objective was to develop and independently replicate an individual risk calculator for bipolar spectrum disorders among the offspring of BD parents using data collected in routine clinical practice. METHODS: Data from the longitudinal Canadian High-Risk Offspring cohort study collected from 1996 to 2020 informed the development of a 5 and 10-year risk calculator using parametric time-to-event models with a cure fraction and a generalized gamma distribution. The calculator was then externally validated using data from the Lausanne-Geneva High-Risk Offspring cohort study collected from 1996 to 2020. A time-varying C-index by age in years was used to estimate the probability that the model correctly classified risk. Bias corrected estimates and 95% confidence limits were derived using a jackknife resampling approach. FINDINGS: = 128). Specifically, the time-varying C-index indicated that there was approximately a 70% chance that the model would correctly predict which of two 15-year-olds would be more likely to develop the outcome in the future. External validation within a smaller Swiss cohort showed mixed results. INTERPRETATION: Findings suggest that this model may be a useful clinical tool in routine practice for improved individualized risk estimation of bipolar spectrum disorders among the adolescent offspring of a BD parent; however, risk estimation in younger high-risk offspring is less accurate, perhaps reflecting the evolving nature of psychopathology in early childhood. Based on external validation with a Swiss cohort, the risk calculator may not be as predictive in more heterogenous high-risk populations. FUNDING: The Canadian High-Risk Study has been funded by consecutive operating grants from the Canadian Institutes for Health Research, currently CIHR PJT Grant 152796 he Lausanne-Geneva high-risk study was and is supported by five grants from the Swiss National Foundation (#3200-040,677, #32003B-105,969, #32003B-118,326, #3200-049,746 and #3200-061,974), three grants from the Swiss National Foundation for the National Centres of Competence in Research project "The Synaptic Bases of Mental Diseases" (#125,759, #158,776, and #51NF40 - 185,897), and a grant from GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Genetics.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,008 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».