Exploring the Intersection of Schizophrenia, Machine Learning, and Genomics: Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An increasing body of literature highlights the integration of machine learning with genomic data in psychiatry, particularly for complex mental health disorders such as schizophrenia. These advanced techniques offer promising potential for uncovering various facets of these disorders. A comprehensive review of the current applications of machine learning in conjunction with genomic data within this context can significantly enhance our understanding of the current state of research and its future directions. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to conduct a systematic scoping review of the use of machine learning algorithms with genomic data in the field of schizophrenia. METHODS: To conduct a systematic scoping review, a search was performed in the electronic databases MEDLINE, Web of Science, PsycNet (PsycINFO), and Google Scholar from 2013 to 2024. Studies at the intersection of schizophrenia, genomic data, and machine learning were evaluated. RESULTS: The literature search identified 2437 eligible articles after removing duplicates. Following abstract screening, 143 full-text articles were assessed, and 121 were subsequently excluded. Therefore, 21 studies were thoroughly assessed. Various machine learning algorithms were used in the identified studies, with support vector machines being the most common. The studies notably used genomic data to predict schizophrenia, identify schizophrenia features, discover drugs, classify schizophrenia amongst other mental health disorders, and predict the quality of life of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Several high-quality studies were identified. Yet, the application of machine learning with genomic data in the context of schizophrenia remains limited. Future research is essential to further evaluate the portability of these models and to explore their potential clinical applications.
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 | 0.018 | 0.086 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.027 | 0.024 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".