Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28644851›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2017

Comorbidities in the diseasome are more apparent than real: What Bayesian filtering reveals about the comorbidities of depression.

Peter Marx, Peter Antal, Bence Bolgar, Gyorgy Bagdy, Bill Deakin, Gabriella Juhasz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Scoring functions for drug-effect similarity.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2021
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Peter MarxMTA-SE Neuropsychopharmacology and Neurochemistry Research Group, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8821-3622
Peter AntalDepartment of Measurement and Information Systems, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Budapest, Hungary.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4370-2198
Bence BolgarDepartment of Measurement and Information Systems, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Budapest, Hungary.
Gyorgy BagdyMTA-SE Neuropsychopharmacology and Neurochemistry Research Group, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8141-3410
Bill DeakinNeuroscience and Psychiatry Unit, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK and Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Gabriella JuhaszMTA-SE Neuropsychopharmacology and Neurochemistry Research Group, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5975-4267

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_QA137853
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Comorbidity patterns have become a major source of information to explore shared mechanisms of pathogenesis between disorders. In hypothesis-free exploration of comorbid conditions, disease-disease networks are usually identified by pairwise methods. However, interpretation of the results is hindered by several confounders. In particular a very large number of pairwise associations can arise indirectly through other comorbidity associations and they increase exponentially with the increasing breadth of the investigated diseases. To investigate and filter this effect, we computed and compared pairwise approaches with a systems-based method, which constructs a sparse Bayesian direct multimorbidity map (BDMM) by systematically eliminating disease-mediated comorbidity relations. Additionally, focusing on depression-related parts of the BDMM, we evaluated correspondence with results from logistic regression, text-mining and molecular-level measures for comorbidities such as genetic overlap and the interactome-based association score. We used a subset of the UK Biobank Resource, a cross-sectional dataset including 247 diseases and 117,392 participants who filled out a detailed questionnaire about mental health. The sparse comorbidity map confirmed that depressed patients frequently suffer from both psychiatric and somatic comorbid disorders. Notably, anxiety and obesity show strong and direct relationships with depression. The BDMM identified further directly co-morbid somatic disorders, e.g. irritable bowel syndrome, fibromyalgia, or migraine. Using the subnetwork of depression and metabolic disorders for functional analysis, the interactome-based system-level score showed the best agreement with the sparse disease network. This indicates that these epidemiologically strong disease-disease relations have improved correspondence with expected molecular-level mechanisms. The substantially fewer number of comorbidity relations in the BDMM compared to pairwise methods implies that biologically meaningful comorbid relations may be less frequent than earlier pairwise methods suggested. The computed interactive comprehensive multimorbidity views over the diseasome are available on the web at Co=MorNet: bioinformatics.mit.bme.hu/UKBNetworks.

Indexed as

Bayes TheoremComorbidityModels, StatisticalProportional Hazards ModelsComputer SimulationData Interpretation, StatisticalData MiningDepressionHumansIncidenceIrritable Bowel SyndromeMental DisordersMetabolic DiseasesMigraine DisordersNeurodegenerative DiseasesPattern Recognition, Automated

Identifiers

PMID28644851
PMCPMC5507322

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.