MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036341959 · doi:10.1002/hbm.25095

Automated classification of depression from structural brain measures across two independent community‐based cohorts

2020· article· en· W3036341959 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Aleks Stolicyn, Mathew A. Harris, Xueyi Shen, Miruna C. Barbu, Mark J. Adams, Emma L. Hawkins, Laura de Nooij, Hon Wah Yeung, Alison D. Murray, Stephen M. Lawrie, J. Douglas Steele, Andrew M. McIntosh, Heather C. Whalley

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Brain Mapping · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilDirectorate for Biological SciencesCentre for Cognitive Ageing and Cognitive EpidemiologyAge UKDr Mortimer and Theresa Sackler FoundationUniversity of EdinburghMedical Research Council CanadaWellcome Trust
KeywordsMajor depressive disorderCohortNeuroimagingPopulationPsychologyMedical diagnosisMedicineClinical psychologyPsychiatryInternal medicinePathologyCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Major depressive disorder (MDD) has been the subject of many neuroimaging case-control classification studies. Although some studies report accuracies ≥80%, most have investigated relatively small samples of clinically-ascertained, currently symptomatic cases, and did not attempt replication in larger samples. We here first aimed to replicate previously reported classification accuracies in a small, well-phenotyped community-based group of current MDD cases with clinical interview-based diagnoses (from STratifying Resilience and Depression Longitudinally cohort, 'STRADL'). We performed a set of exploratory predictive classification analyses with measures related to brain morphometry and white matter integrity. We applied three classifier types-SVM, penalised logistic regression or decision tree-either with or without optimisation, and with or without feature selection. We then determined whether similar accuracies could be replicated in a larger independent population-based sample with self-reported current depression (UK Biobank cohort). Additional analyses extended to lifetime MDD diagnoses-remitted MDD in STRADL, and lifetime-experienced MDD in UK Biobank. The highest cross-validation accuracy (75%) was achieved in the initial current MDD sample with a decision tree classifier and cortical surface area features. The most frequently selected decision tree split variables included surface areas of bilateral caudal anterior cingulate, left lingual gyrus, left superior frontal, right precentral and paracentral regions. High accuracy was not achieved in the larger samples with self-reported current depression (53.73%), with remitted MDD (57.48%), or with lifetime-experienced MDD (52.68-60.29%). Our results indicate that high predictive classification accuracies may not immediately translate to larger samples with broader criteria for depression, and may not be robust across different classification approaches.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.154
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations41
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Brain MappingSame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207