Mental Illness Diagnoses May Not Cause All Mental Symptoms: A Simulation Study for Major Depressive Episodes, Dysthymic Disorder, and Manic Episodes
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Objectives This study aims to understand the statistical significance of the associations between diagnoses and symptoms based on simulations that have been used to understand the interpretability of mental illness diagnoses. Methods The symptoms for the diagnosis of major depressive episodes, dysthymic disorder, and manic episodes were extracted from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR, American Psychiatric Association, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania). Without real-world symptom data, we simulated populations using various combinations of symptom prevalence and correlations. Assuming symptoms occurred with similar prevalence and correlations, for each combination of symptom prevalence (0.05, 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, and 0.7) and correlation (0, 0.1, 0.4, 0.7, and 0.9), 100 cohorts with 10,000 individuals were randomly created. Diagnoses were made according to the DSM-IV-TR criteria. The associations between the diagnoses and their input symptoms were quantified with odds ratios and correlation coefficients. P-values from 100 cohorts for each combination of symptom prevalence and correlation were summarized. Results Three mental illness diagnoses were not significantly correlated with their own symptoms in all simulations, particularly when symptoms were not correlated, except for the symptom in the major criteria of major depressive episodes or dysthymic disorder. The symptoms for the diagnosis of major depressive episodes and dysthymic disorder were significantly correlated with these two diagnoses in some simulations, assuming 0.1, 0.4, 0.7, or 0.9 symptom correlations, except for one symptom. The overlap in the input symptoms for the diagnosis of major depressive episodes and dysthymic disorder also leads to significant correlations between these two diagnoses, assuming 0.1, 0.4, 0.7, and 0.9 correlations between input symptoms. Manic episodes are not significantly associated with the input symptoms of major depressive episodes and dysthymic disorder. Conclusion There are challenges to establish the causation between psychiatric symptoms and mental illness diagnoses. There is insufficient prevalence and incidence data to show all psychiatric symptoms exist or can be observed in patients. The diagnostic accuracy of symptoms to detect a disease cause is far from perfect. Assuming the symptoms of three mood disorders may present in patients, three diagnoses are not significantly associated with all psychiatric symptoms used to diagnose them. The diagnostic criteria of the three diagnoses have not been designed to guarantee significant associations between symptoms and diagnoses. Because statistical associations are important for making causal inferences, there may be a lack of causation between diagnoses and symptoms. Previous research has identified factors that lead to insignificant associations between diagnoses and symptoms, including biases due to data processing and a lack of epidemiological evidence to support the design of mental illness diagnostic criteria.
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 | 0,009 | 0,032 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 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 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 ».