MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791564041 · doi:10.1093/ijnp/pyy036

Levels of Serum Brain-Derived Neurotropic Factor in Individuals at Ultra-High Risk for Psychosis—Findings from the Longitudinal Youth at Risk Study (LYRIKS)

2018· article· en· W2791564041 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jie Yin Yee, Tih-Shih Lee, Jimmy Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNerve injury and regeneration
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Medical Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilNational Research Foundation SingaporeNational Research Foundation
KeywordsPsychosisPsychologyPsychiatryRisk factorNeuroscienceMedicineClinical psychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Identifying biomarkers to enrich prognostication and risk predictions in individuals at high risk of developing psychosis will enable stratified early intervention efforts. Brain-derived neurotrophic factor has been widely studied in schizophrenia and in first-episode psychosis with promising results. The aim of this study was to examine the levels of serum brain-derived neurotrophic factor between healthy controls and individuals with ultra-high risk of psychosis. METHODS: A sample of 106 healthy controls and 105 ultra-high risk of psychosis individuals from the Longitudinal Youth at Risk Study was included in this study. Ultra-high risk of psychosis status was determined using the Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental State at recruitment. Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia was used to assess the severity of depression. All participants were followed up for 2 years, and ultra-high risk of psychosis remitters were defined by ultra-high risk of psychosis individuals who no longer fulfilled Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental State criteria at the end of the study period. Levels of brain-derived neurotrophic factor were measured in the serum by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay method. RESULTS: The ultra-high risk of psychosis group had significantly higher baseline levels of serum brain-derived neurotrophic factor compared with the control group (3.7 vs 3.3 ng/mL, P=.018). However, baseline levels of serum brain-derived neurotrophic factor did not predict the development of psychosis (OR=0.64, CI=0.40-1.02) or remission (OR=0.83, CI=0.60-1.15) from ultra-high risk of psychosis status. CONCLUSION: Findings from our study did not support a role for serum brain-derived neurotrophic factor in predicting outcomes in ultra-high risk of psychosis individuals. However, the finding of higher levels of serum brain-derived neurotrophic factor in ultra-high risk of psychosis individuals deserves further study.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.470
Threshold uncertainty score0.628

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.286 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of NeuropsychopharmacologySame topicNerve injury and regenerationFrench-language works237,207