MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4411131399 · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1570797

Exploring the predictive value of structural covariance networks for the diagnosis of schizophrenia

2025· article· en· W4411131399 on OpenAlexaff
Clara Vetter, A.E. Bender, Dominic Dwyer, Max Montembeault, Anne Ruef, Katharine Chisholm, Lana Kambeitz‐Ilankovic, Linda A. Antonucci, Stephan Ruhrmann, Joseph Kambeitz, Marlene Rosen, Theresa Lichtenstein, Anita Riecher‐Rössler, Rachel Upthegrove, Raimo K. R. Salokangas, Jarmo Hietala, Christos Pantelis, Rebekka Lencer, Eva Meisenzahl, Stephen J. Wood, Paolo Brambilla, Stefan Borgwardt, Peter Falkai, Alessandro Bertolino, Nikolaos Koutsouleris

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychiatry · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsDouglas Mental Health University Institute
FundersElitenetzwerk BayernNational Institutes of HealthElse Kröner-Fresenius-StiftungBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungEuropean CommissionWellcome Trust
KeywordsSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Predictive valueCovariancePsychologyValue (mathematics)PsychiatryMedicineClinical psychologyComputer scienceMachine learningMathematicsStatisticsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Schizophrenia is a psychiatric disorder hypothesized to result from disturbed brain connectivity. Structural covariance networks (SCN) describe the shared variation in morphological properties emerging from coordinated neurodevelopmental processes, This study evaluates the potential of SCNs as diagnostic biomarker for schizophrenia. Methods We compared the diagnostic value of two SCN computation methods derived from regional gray matter volume (GMV) in 154 patients with a diagnosis of first episode psychosis or recurrent schizophrenia (PAT) and 366 healthy control individuals (HC). The first method (REF-SCN) quantifies the contribution of an individual to a normative reference group’s SCN, and the second approach (KLS-SCN) uses a symmetric version of Kulback-Leibler divergence. Their diagnostic value compared to regional GMV was assessed in a stepwise analysis using a series of linear support vector machines within a nested cross-validation framework and stacked generalization, all models were externally validated in an independent sample (NPAT=71, NHC=74), SCN feature importance was assessed, and the derived risk scores were analyzed for differential relationships with clinical variables. Results We found that models trained on SCNs were able to classify patients with schizophrenia and combining SCNs and regional GMV in a stacked model improved training (balanced accuracy (BAC)=69.96%) and external validation performance (BAC=67.10%). Among all unimodal models, the highest discovery sample performance was achieved by a model trained on REF-SCN (balanced accuracy (BAC=67.03%). All model decisions were driven by widespread structural covariance alterations involving the somato-motor, default mode, control, visual, and the ventral attention networks. Risk estimates derived from KLS-SCNs and regional GMV, but not REF-SCNs, could be predicted from clinical variables, especially driven by body mass index (BMI) and affect-related negative symptoms. Discussion These patterns of results show that different SCN computation approaches capture different aspects of the disease. While REF-SCNs contain valuable information for discriminating schizophrenia from healthy control individuals, KLS-SCNs may capture more nuanced symptom-level characteristics similar to those captured by PCA of regional GMV.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Psychiatry→Same topicSchizophrenia research and treatment→French-language works237,207→