Deciphering white matter microstructural alterations in catatonia according to ICD-11: replication and machine learning analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Catatonia is a severe psychomotor disorder characterized by motor, affective and cognitive-behavioral abnormalities. Although previous magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies suggested white matter (WM) dysconnectivity in the pathogenesis of catatonia, it is unclear whether microstructural alterations of WM tracts connecting psychomotor regions might contribute to a better classification of catatonia patients. Here, diffusion-weighted MRI data were collected from two independent cohorts (whiteCAT/replication cohort) of patients with (n = 45/n = 13) and without (n = 56/n = 26) catatonia according to ICD-11 criteria. Catatonia severity was examined using the Northoff (NCRS) and Bush-Francis (BFCRS) Catatonia Rating Scales. We used tract-based spatial statistics (TBSS), tractometry (TractSeg) and machine-learning (ML) to classify catatonia patients from tractometry values as well as tractomics features generated by the newly developed tool RadTract. Catatonia patients showed fractional anisotropy (FA) alterations measured via TractSeg in different corpus callosum segments (CC_1, CC_3, CC_4, CC_5 and CC_6) compared to non-catatonia patients across both cohorts. Our classification results indicated a higher level of performance when trained on tractomics as opposed to traditional tractometry values. Moreover, in the CC_6, we successfully trained two classifiers using the tractomics features identified in the whiteCAT data. These classifiers were applied separately to the whiteCAT and replication cohorts, demonstrating comparable performance with Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristics (AUROC) values of 0.79 for the whiteCAT cohort and 0.76 for the replication cohort. In contrast, training on FA tractometry resulted in lower AUROC values of 0.66 for the whiteCAT cohort and 0.51 for the replication cohort. In conclusion, these findings underscore the significance of CC WM microstructural alterations in the pathophysiology of catatonia. The successful use of an ML based classification model to identify catatonia patients has the potential to improve diagnostic precision.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".