MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398249659 · doi:10.1016/j.jad.2024.05.095

Abnormal resting-state EEG phase dynamics distinguishes major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder

2024· article· en· W4398249659 on OpenAlexaff
Stephan Lechner, Georg Northoff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Affective Disorders · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Research Topics
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ottawa Mental Health CentreUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBipolar disorderMajor depressive disorderElectroencephalographyResting state fMRIPsychologyPsychiatryNeuroscienceMedicineMood

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Changes in EEG have been reported in both major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar disorder (BD). Specifically, power changes in EEG alpha and theta frequency bands during rest and task are known in both disorders. This leaves open whether there are changes in yet another component of the electrophysiological EEG signal, namely phase-related processes that may allow for distinguishing MDD and BD. For that purpose, we investigate EEG-based spontaneous phase in the resting state of MDD, BD and healthy controls. Our main findings show: (i) decreased spontaneous phase variability in frontal theta of both MDD and BD compared to HC; (ii) decreased spontaneous phase variability in central-parietal alpha in MDD compared to both BD and HC; (iii) increased delays or lags of alpha phase cycles in MDD (but not in BD), which (iv) correlate with the decreased phase variability in MDD. Together, we show similar (decreased frontal theta variability) and distinct (decreased central-parietal alpha variability with increased lags or delays) findings in the spontaneous phase dynamics of MDD and BD. This suggests potential relevance of theta and alpha phase dynamics in distinguishing MDD and BD in clinical differential-diagnosis.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.844
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.367 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations17
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Affective DisordersSame topicMental Health Research TopicsFrench-language works237,207