The Role of Gut Microbiota in the High-Risk Construct of Severe Mental Disorders: A Mini Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Severe mental disorders (SMD) are highly prevalent psychiatric conditions exerting an enormous toll on society. Therefore, prevention of SMD has received enormous attention in the last two decades. Preventative approaches are based on the knowledge and detailed characterization of the developmental stages of SMD and on risk prediction. One relevant biological component, so far neglected in high risk research, is microbiota. The human microbiota consists in the ensemble of microbes, including viruses, bacteria, and eukaryotes, that inhabit several ecological niches of the organism. Due to its demonstrated role in modulating illness and health, as well in influencing behavior, much interest has focused on the characterization of the microbiota inhabiting the gut. Several studies in animal models have shown the early modifications in the gut microbiota might impact on neurodevelopment and the onset of deficits in social behavior corresponding to distinct neurosignaling alterations. However, despite this evidence, only one study investigated the effect of altered microbiome and risk of developing mental disorders in humans, showing that individuals at risk for SMD had significantly different global microbiome composition than healthy controls. We then offer a developmental perspective and provided mechanistic insights on how changes in the microbiota could influence the risk of SMD. We suggest that the analysis of microbiota should be included in the comprehensive assessment generally performed in populations at high risk for SMD as it can inform predictive models and ultimately preventative strategies.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".