Prediction of suicidality in bipolar disorder using variability of intrinsic brain activity and machine learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bipolar disorder (BD) is associated with marked suicidal susceptibility, particularly during a major depressive episode. However, the evaluation of suicidal risk remains challenging since it relies mainly on self-reported information from patients. Hence, it is necessary to complement neuroimaging features with advanced machine learning techniques in order to predict suicidal behavior in BD patients. In this study, a total of 288 participants, including 75 BD suicide attempters, 101 BD nonattempters and 112 healthy controls, underwent a resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI). Intrinsic brain activity was measured by amplitude of low-frequency fluctuation (ALFF). We trained and tested a two-level k-nearest neighbors (k-NN) model based on resting-state variability of ALFF with fivefold cross-validation. BD suicide attempters had increased dynamic ALFF values in the right anterior cingulate cortex, left thalamus and right precuneus. Compared to other machine learning methods, our proposed framework had a promising performance with 83.52% accuracy, 78.75% sensitivity and 87.50% specificity. The trained models could also replicate and validate the results in an independent cohort with 72.72% accuracy. These findings based on a relatively large data set, provide a promising way of combining fMRI data with machine learning technique to reliably predict suicide attempt at an individual level in bipolar depression. Overall, this work might enhance our understanding of the neurobiology of suicidal behavior by detecting clinically defined disruptions in the dynamics of instinct brain activity.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".