M8. Risk Trajectory of Children at Genetic Risk of Major Mood or Psychotic Disorders: Clustering of Risk Indicators as a Basis for a Preclinical Staging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Research on “clinically at risk” (CHR) youths has thrived in the last decade, producing important findings on vulnerabilities to psychosis and opportunities for prevention. Yet, the CHR stage is more and more viewed as a late phase of risk (1). Investigating the earlier phases of risk in children at genetic risk who carry developmental disorders and have a 15-fold increased risk of developing major psychoses (MP: schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, major depression), might thus be a key to understanding the neurodevelopmental roots of illness (2). In this view, recent findings have shown that the aggregation of risk indicators along the risk trajectory is highly predictive of future transition to illness in children born to affected parents from our Eastern Quebec Kindred Study (3) and in CHR youths from the NAPLS-2 study (4). We are now focusing ahead on the determinants, nature and timings of this clustering to decipher mechanisms and develop a clinical staging of the risk trajectory. Methods: We characterized the developmental trajectory of children at genetic risk with longitudinal assessments across a period of 11 years, with repeated measures of 5 established risk indicators: cognitive impairments, psychotic-like experiences, nonpsychotic DSM diagnosis, trauma and drug use. We assessed deteriorations of the trajectory in social functioning and transition to the disease. We hypothesized that the timing of the aggregation process determines the degree of later deterioration. Results: The predictive values of future transition for each risk indicator were low in these vulnerable offspring (relative risks RR~2). In contrast, transitioners accumulated more risk indicators in childhood-adolescence than non-transitioners (RR = 3.36). Around 60% of children remained stable over time in terms of aggregation, whereas 40% experienced changes in the number of risk indicators carried. We devised a model of preclinical staging to classify the children-adolescents using the increasing level of clustering of risk endophenotypes in a child. The model showed a satisfactory level of inter-individual and inter-sib variability. Conclusion: The accumulation of risk indicators in a child would predict deterioration in the trajectory and we observed change and stability over time in the clustering process. Such aggregations of risk markers have incidentally been also observed in other complex disorders such as metabolic-cardiovascular disorders (5). This may set the basis for models of a preclinical staging toward preventive practice guidelines. 1. Seidman, L.J. and Nordentoft, M. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 2015. 2. Maziade, M. and Paccalet, T. Schizophrenia Research, 2013. 3. Paccalet, T., et al. Schizophrenia Research, 2016. 4. Cannon, T.D., et al. American Journal of Psychiatry, 2016. 5. Maziade, M. and Paccalet, T. JAMA Pediatrics, 2014.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".