MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411499545 · doi:10.1017/neu.2025.10020

Sex differences in the network structures of depressive symptom profiles in Asian patients with depressive disorders: findings from the Research on Asian Psychotropic Patterns for Antidepressants, Phase 3

2025· article· en· W4411499545 on OpenAlexaff
Han Seul Kim, Seonjae Lee, Jeongha Lee, Tae Young Choi, Sung-Won Jung, Hyung‐Jun Yoon, Hyun-Soo Kim, Yangsik Kim, Hyun Ju Yang, Narae Jeong, Eunsoo Moon, Daeho Kim, Tianmei Si, Roy Abraham Kallivayalil, Andi Jayalangkara Tanra, Amir Hossein Jalali Nadoushan, Kok Yoon Chee, Afzal Javed, Kang Sim, Pornjira Pariwatcharakul, Mian‐Yoon Chong, Toshiya Inada, Shih‐Ku Lin, Norman Sartorius, Naotaka Shinfuku, Takahiro A. Kato, Jae-Hon Lee, Seon‐Cheol Park

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Neuropsychiatrica · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Research Topics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Research Foundation of KoreaNational Research FoundationUniversity of Cambridge
KeywordsDepression (economics)Depressive symptomsMajor depressive disorderCluster (spacecraft)Medical prescriptionClinical psychologyPsychiatryMedicinePsychologyDemographyAnxietyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Depression is a complex mental health disorder with highly heterogeneous symptoms that vary significantly across individuals, influenced by various factors, including sex and regional contexts. Network analysis is an analytical method that provides a robust framework for evaluating the heterogeneity of depressive symptoms and identifying their potential clinical implications. OBJECTIVE: To investigate sex-specific differences in the network structures of depressive symptoms in Asian patients diagnosed with depressive disorders, using data from the Research on Asian Psychotropic Prescription Patterns for Antidepressants, Phase 3, which was conducted in 2023. METHODS: A network analysis of 10 depressive symptoms defined according to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines was performed. The sex-specific differences in the network structures of the depressive symptoms were examined using the Network Comparison Test. Subgroup analysis of the sex-specific differences in the network structures was performed according to geographical region classifications, including East Asia, Southeast Asia, and South or West Asia. RESULTS: A total of 998 men and 1,915 women with depression were analysed in this study. The analyses showed that all 10 depressive symptoms were grouped into a single cluster. Low self-confidence and loss of interest emerged as the most central nodes for men and women, respectively. In addition, a significant difference in global strength invariance was observed between the networks. In the regional subgroup analysis, only East Asian men showed two distinct clustering patterns. In addition, significant differences in global strength and network structure were observed only between East Asian men and women. CONCLUSION: The study highlights the sex-specific differences in depressive symptom networks across Asian countries. The results revealed that low self-confidence and loss of interest are the main symptoms of depression in Asian men and women, respectively. The network connections were more localised in men, whereas women showed a more diverse network. Among the Asian subgroups analysed, only East Asians exhibited significant differences in network structure. The considerable effects of neurovegetative symptoms in men may indicate potential neurobiological underpinnings of depression in the East Asian population.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.354 · 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 venueActa NeuropsychiatricaSame topicMental Health Research TopicsFrench-language works237,207