Using heart rate profiles during sleep as a biomarker of depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Abnormalities in heart rate during sleep linked to impaired neuro-cardiac modulation may provide new information about physiological sleep signatures of depression. This study assessed the validity of an algorithm using patterns of heart rate changes during sleep to discriminate between individuals with depression and healthy controls. METHODS: A heart rate profiling algorithm was modeled using machine-learning based on 1203 polysomnograms from individuals with depression referred to a sleep clinic for the assessment of sleep abnormalities, including insomnia, excessive daytime fatigue, and sleep-related breathing disturbances (n = 664) and mentally healthy controls (n = 529). The final algorithm was tested on a distinct sample (n = 174) to categorize each individual as depressed or not depressed. The resulting categorizations were compared to medical record diagnoses. RESULTS: The algorithm had an overall classification accuracy of 79.9% [sensitivity: 82.8, 95% CI (0.73-0.89), specificity: 77.0, 95% CI (0.67-0.85)]. The algorithm remained highly sensitive across subgroups stratified by age, sex, depression severity, comorbid psychiatric illness, cardiovascular disease, and smoking status. CONCLUSIONS: Sleep-derived heart rate patterns could act as an objective biomarker of depression, at least when it co-occurs with sleep disturbances, and may serve as a complimentary objective diagnostic tool. These findings highlight the extent to which some autonomic functions are impaired in individuals with depression, which warrants further investigation about potential underlying mechanisms.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".