Bibliographic record
Abstract
A significant proportion of patients diagnosed with major depressive disorder (MDD) encounter frequent hospitalization because of suicidal ideation or after attempting suicide. Moreover, a significant proportion of subjects with MDD commit suicide. As a result, MDD-related suicide is a leading cause of death globally and the main contributor to the number of deaths by suicide. However, the biological mechanisms underpinning both MDD-related and MDD-unrelated suicide remain elusive. Studies using human postmortem brain samples of MDD patients who died as a result of suicide suggest dysfunction of neurotransmitter systems, including the GABAergic systems at the biochemical, gene, cellular, brain area, and function levels. In this chapter, we review human postmortem studies on major depression from our research group, which suggest selective and robust alterations in the functioning of specific GABA-related genes. We then compare these findings between MDD subjects who died from suicide and those who died from other causes. Despite the low level of evidence provided by these studies in support of a dysfunction in the GABA system associated with suicide, we suggest that further and systematic molecular studies are needed to resolve the conflicting results reported in the literature. Moreover, clinical investigations using tools that directly engage cortical GABA function, such as transcranial magnetic stimulation, suggest that functional studies of the GABA system in clinical subjects may provide mechanistic insight and have potential therapeutic purpose.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".