Anxiety onset in adolescents: a machine-learning prediction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent longitudinal studies in youth have reported MRI correlates of prospective anxiety symptoms during adolescence, a vulnerable period for the onset of anxiety disorders. However, their predictive value has not been established. Individual prediction through machine-learning algorithms might help bridge the gap to clinical relevance. A voting classifier with Random Forest, Support Vector Machine and Logistic Regression algorithms was used to evaluate the predictive pertinence of gray matter volumes of interest and psychometric scores in the detection of prospective clinical anxiety. Participants with clinical anxiety at age 18-23 (N = 156) were investigated at age 14 along with healthy controls (N = 424). Shapley values were extracted for in-depth interpretation of feature importance. Prospective prediction of pooled anxiety disorders relied mostly on psychometric features and achieved moderate performance (area under the receiver operating curve = 0.68), while generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) prediction achieved similar performance. MRI regional volumes did not improve the prediction performance of prospective pooled anxiety disorders with respect to psychometric features alone, but they improved the prediction performance of GAD, with the caudate and pallidum volumes being among the most contributing features. To conclude, in non-anxious 14 year old adolescents, future clinical anxiety onset 4-8 years later could be individually predicted. Psychometric features such as neuroticism, hopelessness and emotional symptoms were the main contributors to pooled anxiety disorders prediction. Neuroanatomical data, such as caudate and pallidum volume, proved valuable for GAD and should be included in prospective clinical anxiety prediction in adolescents.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".