Multimodal Imaging-Based Classification of PTSD Using Data-Driven Computational Approaches: A Multisite Big Data Study from the ENIGMA-PGC PTSD Consortium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Current clinical assessments of Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) rely solely on subjective symptoms and experiences reported by the patient, rather than objective biomarkers of the illness. Recent advances in data-driven computational approaches have been helpful in devising tools to objectively diagnose psychiatric disorders. Here we aimed to classify individuals with PTSD versus controls using heterogeneous brain datasets from the ENIGMA-PGC PTSD Working group. Methods We analyzed brain MRI data from 3,527 structural-MRI; 2,502 resting state-fMRI; and 1,953 diffusion-MRI. First, we identified the brain features that best distinguish individuals with PTSD from controls (TEHC and HC) using traditional machine learning methods. Second, we assessed the utility of the denoising variational autoencoder (DVAE) and evaluated its classification performance. Third, we assessed the generalizability and reproducibility of both models using leave-one-site-out cross-validation procedure for each modality. Results We found lower performance in classifying PTSD vs. controls with data from over 20 sites (60% test AUC for s-MRI, 59% for rs-fMRI and 56% for d-MRI), as compared to other studies run on single-site data. The performance increased when classifying PTSD from HC without trauma history across all three modalities (75% AUC). The classification performance remained intact when applying the DVAE framework, which reduced the number of features. Finally, we found that the DVAE framework achieved better generalization to unseen datasets compared with the traditional machine learning frameworks, albeit performance was slightly above chance. Conclusion Our findings highlight the promise offered by machine learning methods for the diagnosis of patients with PTSD. The utility of brain biomarkers across three MRI modalities and the contribution of DVAE models for improving generalizability offers new insights into neural mechanisms involved in PTSD. Significance ⍰ Classifying PTSD from trauma-unexposed healthy controls (HC) using three imaging modalities performed well (∼75% AUC), but performance suffered markedly when classifying PTSD from trauma-exposed healthy controls (TEHC) using three imaging modalities (∼60% AUC). ⍰ Using deep learning for feature reduction (denoising variational auto-encoder; DVAE) dramatically reduced the number of features with no concomitant performance degradation. ⍰ Utilizing denoising variational autoencoder (DVAE) models improves generalizability across heterogeneous multi-site data compared with the traditional machine learning frameworks
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 | 0.008 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".