White matter diffusion estimates in obsessive-compulsive disorder across 1,653 individuals: Machine learning findings from the ENIGMA OCD Working Group
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".