The <i>Psy</i>chosis <scp>MRI</scp><i>Share</i>d <i>D</i>ata Resource (Psy‐<scp>ShareD</scp>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neuroimaging research in the field of schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders has sought to investigate neuroanatomical markers, relative to healthy control groups. In recent decades, a large number of structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies have been funded and undertaken, but their small sample sizes and heterogeneous methods have led to inconsistencies across findings. To tackle this, efforts have been made to combine datasets across studies and sites. While notable recent multicentre initiatives and the resulting meta- and mega-analytical outputs have progressed the field, efforts have generally been restricted to MRI scans in one or two illness stages, often overlook patient heterogeneity, and study populations have rarely been globally representative of the diversity of patients who experience psychosis. Furthermore, access to these datasets is often restricted to consortia members who can contribute data, likely from research institutions located in high-income countries. The Psychosis MRI Shared Data Resource (Psy-ShareD) is a new open access structural MRI data sharing partnership that will host pre-existing structural T1-weighted MRI data collected across multiple sites worldwide, including the Global South. MRI T1 data included in Psy-ShareD will be available in image and feature-level formats, having been harmonised using state-of-the-art approaches. All T1 data will be linked to demographic and illness-related (diagnosis, symptoms, medication status) measures, and in a number of datasets, IQ and cognitive data, and medication history will also be available, allowing subgroup and dimensional analyses. Psy-ShareD will be free-to-access for all researchers. Importantly, comprehensive data catalogues, scientific support and training resources will be available to facilitate use by early career researchers and build capacity in the field. We are actively seeking new collaborators to contribute further T1 data. Collaborators will benefit in terms of authorships, as all publications arising from Psy-ShareD will include data contributors as authors.
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 | 0.006 | 0.048 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.533 | 0.235 |
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".