Genetics of suicide ideation. A role for inflammation and neuroplasticity?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Suicide is a leading cause of death worldwide. Suicide ideation (SI) is a known risk factor for suicide behaviour (SB). The current psychobiology and genetic predisposition to SI and SB are poorly defined. Despite convincing relevance of a genetic background for SI, there is no current implementable knowledge about the genetic makeup that identifies subjects at risk for it. One of the possible reasons for the absence of a clear-cut evidence is the polygenetic nature of SI along with the very large sample sizes that are needed to observe significant genetic association result. The CATIE sample was instrumental to the analysis. SI was retrieved as measured by the Calgary test. Clinical possible covariates were identified by a nested regression model. A principal component analysis helped in defining the possible genetic stratification factors. A GWAS analysis, polygenic risk score associated with a random forest analysis and a molecular pathway analysis were undertaken to identify the genetic contribution to SI. As a result, 741 Schizophrenic individuals from the CATIE were available for the genetic analysis, including 166,325 SNPs after quality control and pruning. No GWAS significant result was found. The random forest analysis conducted by combining the polygenic risk score and several clinical variables resulted in a possibly overfitting model (OOB error rate < 1%). The molecular pathway analysis revealed several molecular pathways possibly involved in SI, of which those involved in microglia functioning were of particular interest. A medium-small sample of SKZ individuals was analyzed to shed a light on the genetic of SI. As an expected result from the underpowered sample, no GWAS positive result was retrieved, but the molecular pathway analysis indicated a possible role of microglia and neurodevelopment in SI.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".