MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405837714 · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1012693

Therapeutic dose prediction of α5-GABA receptor modulation from simulated EEG of depression severity

2024· article· en· W4405837714 on OpenAlexafffund
Alexandre Guet-McCreight, Frank Mazza, Thomas D. Prévot, Etienne Sibille, Etay Hay

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS Computational Biology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural dynamics and brain function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersKrembil Foundation
KeywordsElectroencephalographyNeuroscienceInterneuronEpilepsyMajor depressive disorderDepression (economics)Treatment-resistant depressionBrain activity and meditationHuman brainMedicinePsychologyPharmacologyCognitionInhibitory postsynaptic potential

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Treatment for major depressive disorder (depression) often has partial efficacy and a large portion of patients are treatment resistant. Recent studies implicate reduced somatostatin (SST) interneuron inhibition in depression, and new pharmacology boosting this inhibition via positive allosteric modulators of α5-GABAA receptors (α5-PAM) offers a promising effective treatment. However, testing the effect of α5-PAM on human brain activity is limited, meriting the use of detailed simulations. We utilized our previous detailed computational models of human depression microcircuits with reduced SST interneuron inhibition and α5-PAM effects, to simulate EEG of individual microcircuits across depression severity and α5-PAM doses. We developed machine learning models that predicted optimal dose from EEG with high accuracy and recovered microcircuit activity and EEG. This study provides dose prediction models for α5-PAM administration based on EEG biomarkers of depression severity. Given limitations in doing the above in the living human brain, the results and tools we developed will facilitate translation of α5-PAM treatment to clinical use.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.873
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.235 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS Computational BiologySame topicNeural dynamics and brain functionFrench-language works237,207