MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117357429 · doi:10.1016/j.jad.2025.121060

Data-driven symptom dimensions reveal familial patterns in bipolar disorder

2025· article· en· W7117357429 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Katie Scott, Claire O’Donovan, Sandra Meier, Barbara Pavlova, Dean F. MacKinnon, James B. Potash, Thomas G. Schulze, Jennifer Judy, Peter P. Zandi, Paul Grof, Francis J. McMahon, Abraham Vas Nunes, Martin Alda

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Affective Disorders · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsCentre for Movement DisordersDalhousie University
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthFaculty of Medicine, Dalhousie UniversityCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchResearch Nova ScotiaNova Scotia Health Research FoundationDalhousie Medical Research Foundation
KeywordsBipolar disorderMoodMood disordersGenetic heterogeneityPhenotypeGenetic testing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bipolar disorder (BD) is a highly heritable psychiatric illness whose clinical and genetic heterogeneity complicates efforts to identify biologically-relevant subtypes. Traditional categorical approaches often fail to capture the multidimensional nature of BD symptomatology. This study aimed to evaluate whether data-driven dimensions show familial aggregation, suggesting potential genetic underpinnings. Using two independent cohorts: a primary sample from Halifax ( N = 368) and a replication sample from the NIMH Genetics Initiative Bipolar Disorder Consortium ( N = 1356), latent dimensions were derived from 21 clinical variables with principal component analysis (PCA). The similarity of relatives in the PCA-derived space was quantified and compared to their similarity with unrelated BD subjects. Mixed-effects models assessed whether familial similarity on latent dimensions increased with degree of relatedness. Across both cohorts, the first two principal components (PCs; i.e., mood episode frequency and age of illness onset) were consistent. Overall clinical phenotype was more similar among relatives than among unrelated cases (Halifax: β = 0.316, p = 0.025; NIMH: β = 0.406, p < 0.001; Combined: β = 0.388, p < 0.001). PC 2 (onset) showed significant familial similarity in both cohorts, and PC 1 (episode frequency) showed similarity in the NIMH sample. These findings suggest that latent clinical dimensions, especially those reflecting mood episode recurrence and age of onset, aggregate within families and may reflect underlying genetic liability in BD. Dimensional, data-driven phenotypes could provide more genetically informative traits than traditional diagnostic subtypes and offer promising targets for future genetic and neurobiological research. • Data-driven symptom dimensions were derived using PCA on mixed-type clinical data. • Mood episode frequency and age of onset emerged as consistent latent dimensions. • Relatives showed greater overall similarity in symptom dimensions than unrelated BD cases. • Familial aggregation was strongest for age of onset across both cohorts. • Latent symptom dimensions may aid in identifying genetically informative traits.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Affective DisordersSame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207