Digital Phenotyping for Differential Diagnosis of Major Depressive Episode: Narrative Review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Major depressive episode (MDE) is a common clinical syndrome. It can be found in different pathologies such as major depressive disorder (MDD), bipolar disorder (BD), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), or even occur in the context of psychological trauma. However, only 1 syndrome is described in international classifications (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition [DSM-5]/International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision [ICD-11]), which do not take into account the underlying pathology at the origin of the MDE. Clinical interviews are currently the best source of information to obtain the etiological diagnosis of MDE. Nevertheless, it does not allow an early diagnosis and there are no objective measures of extracted clinical information. To remedy this, the use of digital tools and their correlation with clinical symptomatology could be useful. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to review the current application of digital tools for MDE diagnosis while highlighting shortcomings for further research. In addition, our work was focused on digital devices easy to use during clinical interview and mental health issues where depression is common. METHODS: We conducted a narrative review of the use of digital tools during clinical interviews for MDE by searching papers published in PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases since February 2010. The search was conducted from June to September 2021. Potentially relevant papers were then compared against a checklist for relevance and reviewed independently for inclusion, with focus on 4 allocated topics of (1) automated voice analysis, behavior analysis by (2) video and physiological measures, (3) heart rate variability (HRV), and (4) electrodermal activity (EDA). For this purpose, we were interested in 4 frequently found clinical conditions in which MDE can occur: (1) MDD, (2) BD, (3) PTSD, and (4) psychological trauma. RESULTS: A total of 74 relevant papers on the subject were qualitatively analyzed and the information was synthesized. Thus, a digital phenotype of MDE seems to emerge consisting of modifications in speech features (namely, temporal, prosodic, spectral, source, and formants) and in speech content, modifications in nonverbal behavior (head, hand, body and eyes movement, facial expressivity, and gaze), and a decrease in physiological measurements (HRV and EDA). We not only found similarities but also differences when MDE occurs in MDD, BD, PTSD, or psychological trauma. However, comparative studies were rare in BD or PTSD conditions, which does not allow us to identify clear and distinct digital phenotypes. CONCLUSIONS: Our search identified markers from several modalities that hold promise for helping with a more objective diagnosis of MDE. To validate their potential, further longitudinal and prospective studies are needed.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,017 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,010 | 0,009 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».