MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6939053261 · doi:10.60692/8sc0k-5d904

White matter diffusion estimates in obsessive-compulsive disorder across 1,653 individuals: Machine learning findings from the ENIGMA OCD Working Group

2023· article· en· W6939053261 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneralizability theoryWhite matterDiffusion MRIReceiver operating characteristicFeature (linguistics)Fractional anisotropy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract White matter pathways, typically studied with diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), have been implicated in the neurobiology of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). However, due to limited sample sizes and the predominance of single-site studies, the generalizability of OCD classification based on diffusion white matter estimates remains unclear. Here, we tested classification accuracy using the largest OCD DTI dataset to date, involving 1,336 adult participants (690 OCD patients and 646 healthy controls) and 317 pediatric participants (175 OCD patients and 142 healthy controls) from 18 international sites within the ENIGMA OCD Working Group. We used an automatic machine learning pipeline (with feature engineering and selection, and model optimization) and examined the cross-site generalizability of the OCD classification models using leave-one-site-out cross-validation. Our models showed low-to-moderate accuracy in classifying (1) "OCD vs. healthy controls'' (Adults, receiver operator characteristic-area under the curve = 57.19 ± 3.47 in the replication set; Children, 59.8 ± 7.39), (2) "unmedicated OCD vs. healthy controls" (Adults, 62.67 ± 3.84; Children, 48.51 ± 10.14), and (3) "medicated OCD vs. unmedicated OCD" (Adults, 76.72 ± 3.97; Children, 72.45 ± 8.87). There was significant site variability in model performance (cross-validated ROC AUC ranges 51.6–79.1 in adults; 35.9–63.2 in children). Machine learning interpretation showed that diffusivity measures of the corpus callosum, internal capsule, and posterior thalamic radiation contributed to the classification of OCD from HC. The classification performance appeared greater than the model trained on grey matter morphometry in the prior ENIGMA OCD study (our study includes subsamples from the morphometry study). Taken together, this study points to the meaningful multivariate patterns of white matter features relevant to the neurobiology of OCD, but with low-to-moderate classification accuracy. The OCD classification performance may be constrained by site variability and medication effects on the white matter integrity, indicating room for improvement for future research.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.009

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.238 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information SystemSame topicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersFrench-language works237,207