MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4383499260 · doi:10.1101/2023.07.05.547873

Dimensional and Categorical Solutions to Parsing Depression Heterogeneity in a Large Single-Site Sample

2023· preprint· en· W4383499260 on OpenAlexaff
Katharine Dunlop, Logan Grosenick, Jonathan Downar, Fidel Vila‐Rodriguez, Faith M. Gunning, Zafiris J. Daskalakis, Daniel M. Blumberger, Conor Liston

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCategorical variableMajor depressive disorderPsychologyDepression (economics)Clinical psychologyArtificial intelligenceCognitive psychologyMoodMachine learningComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Recent studies have reported significant advances in modeling the biological basis of heterogeneity in major depressive disorder (MDD), but investigators have also identified important technical challenges, including scanner-related artifacts, a propensity for multivariate models to overfit, and a need for larger samples with deeper clinical phenotyping. The goals of this work were to develop and evaluate dimensional and categorical solutions to parsing heterogeneity in depression that are stable and generalizable in a large, deeply phenotyped, single-site sample. Methods We used regularized canonical correlation analysis (RCCA) to identify data-driven brain-behavior dimensions explaining individual differences in depression symptom domains in a large, single-site dataset comprising clinical assessments and resting state fMRI data for N=328 patients with MDD and N=461 healthy controls. We examined the stability of clinical loadings and model performance in held-out data. Finally, hierarchical clustering on these dimensions was used to identify categorical depression subtypes Results The optimal RCCA model yielded three robust and generalizable brain-behavior dimensions explaining individual differences in depressed mood and anxiety, anhedonia, and insomnia. Hierarchical clustering identified four depression subtypes, each with distinct clinical symptom profiles, abnormal RSFC patterns, and antidepressant responsiveness to repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. Conclusions Our results define dimensional and categorical solutions to parsing neurobiological heterogeneity in MDD that are stable, generalizable, and capable of predicting treatment outcomes, each with distinct advantages in different contexts. They also provide additional evidence that RCCA and hierarchical clustering are effective tools for investigating associations between functional connectivity and clinical symptoms.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies→French-language works237,207→