Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31571370›Full record

Trial reportHuman brain mapping2020

Multimodal fusion of structural and functional brain imaging in depression using linked independent component analysis.

Luigi A Maglanoc, Tobias Kaufmann, Rune Jonassen, Eva Hilland, Dani Beck, Nils Inge Landrø, Lars T Westlye

Abstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Human brain mapping, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Independent component analysis for internet gaming disorder.Dialogues in clinical neuroscience · 2023
    Review
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

7 authors.

Luigi A MaglanocClinical Neuroscience Research Group, Department of Psychology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0003-2556-0779
Tobias KaufmannNORMENT, Division of Mental Health and Addiction, Oslo University Hospital & Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Rune JonassenFaculty of Health Sciences, Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway.
Eva HillandClinical Neuroscience Research Group, Department of Psychology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Dani BeckNORMENT, Division of Mental Health and Addiction, Oslo University Hospital & Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Nils Inge LandrøClinical Neuroscience Research Group, Department of Psychology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Lars T WestlyeNORMENT, Division of Mental Health and Addiction, Oslo University Hospital & Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-8644-956X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previous structural and functional neuroimaging studies have implicated distributed brain regions and networks in depression. However, there are no robust imaging biomarkers that are specific to depression, which may be due to clinical heterogeneity and neurobiological complexity. A dimensional approach and fusion of imaging modalities may yield a more coherent view of the neuronal correlates of depression. We used linked independent component analysis to fuse cortical macrostructure (thickness, area, gray matter density), white matter diffusion properties and resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging default mode network amplitude in patients with a history of depression (n = 170) and controls (n = 71). We used univariate and machine learning approaches to assess the relationship between age, sex, case-control status, and symptom loads for depression and anxiety with the resulting brain components. Univariate analyses revealed strong associations between age and sex with mainly global but also regional specific brain components, with varying degrees of multimodal involvement. In contrast, there were no significant associations with case-control status, nor symptom loads for depression and anxiety with the brain components, nor any interaction effects with age and sex. Machine learning revealed low model performance for classifying patients from controls and predicting symptom loads for depression and anxiety, but high age prediction accuracy. Multimodal fusion of brain imaging data alone may not be sufficient for dissecting the clinical and neurobiological heterogeneity of depression. Precise clinical stratification and methods for brain phenotyping at the individual level based on large training samples may be needed to parse the neuroanatomy of depression.

Indexed as

Machine LearningAdultAge FactorsAnxietyCase-Control StudiesDepressionDepressive DisorderFemaleFunctional NeuroimagingHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedMultimodal ImagingNeuroimagingSex Factorsdepressionheterogeneitylinked independent component analysismachine learningmultimodal MRI

Identifiers

PMID31571370
PMCPMC7267936

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.