MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412441903 · doi:10.2196/65417

Advancing Early Detection of Major Depressive Disorder Using Multisite Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Data: Comparative Analysis of AI Models

2025· article· en· W4412441903 on OpenAlex
Masab Mansoor, Kashif Ansari

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIRx Med · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReceiver operating characteristicMajor depressive disorderFunctional magnetic resonance imagingNeuroimagingAnterior cingulate cortexArtificial intelligenceMachine learningGradient boostingMagnetic resonance imagingPsychologyComputer scienceMedicineRandom forestPsychiatryNeuroscienceRadiologyCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a highly prevalent mental health condition with significant public health implications. Early detection is crucial for timely intervention, but current diagnostic methods often rely on subjective clinical assessments, leading to delayed or inaccurate diagnoses. Advances in neuroimaging and machine learning (ML) offer the potential for objective and accurate early detection. Objective: This study aimed to develop and validate ML models using multisite functional magnetic resonance imaging data for the early detection of MDD, compare their performance, and evaluate their clinical applicability. Methods: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging data from 1200 participants (600 with early-stage MDD and 600 healthy controls) across 3 public datasets. In total, 4 ML models-support vector machine, random forest, gradient boosting machine, and deep neural network-were trained and evaluated using a 5-fold cross-validation framework. Models were assessed for accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, F1-score, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Shapley additive explanations values and activation maximization techniques were applied to interpret model predictions. Results: The deep neural network model demonstrated superior performance with an accuracy of 89% (95% CI 86%-92%) and an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.95 (95% CI 0.93-0.97), outperforming traditional diagnostic methods by 15% (P<.001). Key predictive features included altered functional connectivity between the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, anterior cingulate cortex, and limbic regions. The model achieved 78% sensitivity (95% CI 71%-85%) in identifying individuals who developed MDD within a 2-year follow-up period, demonstrating good generalizability across datasets. Conclusions: Our findings highlight the potential of artificial intelligence-driven approaches for the early detection of MDD, with implications for improving early intervention strategies. While promising, these tools should complement rather than replace clinical expertise, with careful consideration of ethical implications such as patient privacy and model biases.

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.

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)0.002
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 score0.726
Threshold uncertainty score0.692

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.278 · 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