MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079989528 · doi:10.1111/bdi.12162

Advancing biomarker research: utilizing ‘Big Data’ approaches for the characterization and prevention of bipolar disorder

2013· review· en· W2079989528 on OpenAlexaff
Roger S. McIntyre, Jeanette M. Jerrell, Walter Swardfager, Rachael D. Kim, Leonardo Gazzi Costa, Anusha Baskaran, Joanna K. Soczynska, Hanna O. Woldeyohannes, Rodrigo B. Mansur, Elisa Brietzke, Alissa M. Powell, Ashley Gallaugher, Paul Kudlow, Oksana Kaidanovich‐Beilin, Mohammad Alsuwaidan

Bibliographic record

VenueBipolar Disorders · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteMount Sinai HospitalSunnybrook HospitalUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurocognitiveProdromeBipolar disorderBiomarkerPersonalized medicineOmicsGenomicsBig dataMedicineComputer sciencePsychologyPsychiatryBioinformaticsCognitionBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To provide a strategic framework for the prevention of bipolar disorder (BD) that incorporates a 'Big Data' approach to risk assessment for BD. METHODS: Computerized databases (e.g., Pubmed, PsychInfo, and MedlinePlus) were used to access English-language articles published between 1966 and 2012 with the search terms bipolar disorder, prodrome, 'Big Data', and biomarkers cross-referenced with genomics/genetics, transcriptomics, proteomics, metabolomics, inflammation, oxidative stress, neurotrophic factors, cytokines, cognition, neurocognition, and neuroimaging. Papers were selected from the initial search if the primary outcome(s) of interest was (were) categorized in any of the following domains: (i) 'omics' (e.g., genomics), (ii) molecular, (iii) neuroimaging, and (iv) neurocognitive. RESULTS: The current strategic approach to identifying individuals at risk for BD, with an emphasis on phenotypic information and family history, has insufficient predictive validity and is clinically inadequate. The heterogeneous clinical presentation of BD, as well as its pathoetiological complexity, suggests that it is unlikely that a single biomarker (or an exclusive biomarker approach) will sufficiently augment currently inadequate phenotypic-centric prediction models. We propose a 'Big Data'- bioinformatics approach that integrates vast and complex phenotypic, anamnestic, behavioral, family, and personal 'omics' profiling. Bioinformatic processing approaches, utilizing cloud- and grid-enabled computing, are now capable of analyzing data on the order of tera-, peta-, and exabytes, providing hitherto unheard of opportunities to fundamentally revolutionize how psychiatric disorders are predicted, prevented, and treated. High-throughput networks dedicated to research on, and the treatment of, BD, integrating both adult and younger populations, will be essential to sufficiently enroll adequate samples of individuals across the neurodevelopmental trajectory in studies to enable the characterization and prevention of this heterogeneous disorder. CONCLUSIONS: Advances in bioinformatics using a 'Big Data' approach provide an opportunity for novel insights regarding the pathoetiology of BD. The coordinated integration of research centers, inclusive of mixed-age populations, is a promising strategic direction for advancing this line of neuropsychiatric research.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.306
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.094 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations67
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBipolar DisordersSame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207