Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31748126›Full record

ArticleBiological psychiatry2020

Neurobiological Divergence of the Positive and Negative Schizophrenia Subtypes Identified on a New Factor Structure of Psychopathology Using Non-negative Factorization: An International Machine Learning Study.

Ji Chen, Kaustubh R Patil, Susanne Weis, Kang Sim, Thomas Nickl-Jockschat, Juan Zhou, André Aleman, Iris E Sommer, Edith J Liemburg, Felix Hoffstaedter and 15 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biological psychiatry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

61 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

25 authors.

Ji ChenInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine, Brain and Behaviour (INM-7), Research Center Jülich, Jülich, Germany; Institute of Systems Neuroscience, Medical Faculty, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Kaustubh R PatilInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine, Brain and Behaviour (INM-7), Research Center Jülich, Jülich, Germany; Institute of Systems Neuroscience, Medical Faculty, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany. Electronic address: k.patil@fz-juelich.de.
Susanne WeisInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine, Brain and Behaviour (INM-7), Research Center Jülich, Jülich, Germany; Institute of Systems Neuroscience, Medical Faculty, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Kang SimDepartment of General Psychiatry, Institute of Mental Health, Singapore; Research Division, Institute of Mental Health, Singapore.
Thomas Nickl-JockschatIowa Neuroscience Institute, Carver College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa; Department of Psychiatry, Carver College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa.
Juan ZhouCenter for Cognitive Neuroscience, Neuroscience and Behavioral Disorders Program, Duke-National University of Singapore Medical School, Singapore.
André AlemanDepartment of Neuroscience, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Iris E SommerDepartment of Neuroscience, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands; BCN Neuroimaging Center, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Edith J LiemburgRob Giel Research Center, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Felix HoffstaedterInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine, Brain and Behaviour (INM-7), Research Center Jülich, Jülich, Germany; Institute of Systems Neuroscience, Medical Faculty, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Ute HabelDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule (RWTH) Aachen University, Aachen, Germany; Jülich Aachen Research Alliance-Institute Brain Structure Function Relationship, Research Center Jülich, and RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Birgit DerntlDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Xiaojin LiuInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine, Brain and Behaviour (INM-7), Research Center Jülich, Jülich, Germany; Institute of Systems Neuroscience, Medical Faculty, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Jona M FischerInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine, Brain and Behaviour (INM-7), Research Center Jülich, Jülich, Germany; Institute of Systems Neuroscience, Medical Faculty, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Lydia KoglerDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Christina RegenbogenDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule (RWTH) Aachen University, Aachen, Germany; Jülich Aachen Research Alliance-Institute Brain Structure Function Relationship, Research Center Jülich, and RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Vaibhav A DiwadkarDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neuroscience, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan.
Jeffrey A StanleyDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neuroscience, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan.
Valentin RiedlDepartment of Neuroradiology, Rechts der Isar Hospital, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Renaud JardriUniversity of Lille, National Centre for Scientific Research, UMR 9193, SCALab and CHU Lille, Fontan Hospital, CURE platform, Lille, France.
Oliver GruberSection for Experimental Psychopathology and Neuroimaging, Department of General Psychiatry, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Aristeidis SotirasDepartment of Radiology and Institute for Informatics, School of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri.
Christos DavatzikosCenter for Biomedical Image Computing and Analytics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Department of Radiology, Section of Biomedical Image Analysis, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Simon B EickhoffInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine, Brain and Behaviour (INM-7), Research Center Jülich, Jülich, Germany; Institute of Systems Neuroscience, Medical Faculty, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Pharmacotherapy Monitoring and Outcome Survey (PHAMOUS) Investigators

Funding

Meta-anaylsis in human brain mappingR01MH074457 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCIENCE CENTER · PI FOX, PETER THORNTON · 2006 to 2024
$10.5M
Advancing innovative brain imaging to detect altered glutamate modulation and network dynamics in schizophreniaR01MH111177 · NIMH · WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY · PI DIWADKAR, VAIBHAV A., STANLEY, JEFFREY A · 2016 to 2020
$2.9M
Meta-analysis in human brain mappingR56MH074457 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCIENCE CENTER · PI FOX, PETER THORNTON · 2020 to 2020
$543k
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH074457NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH111177NIMH NIH HHS R56 MH074457
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDisentangling psychopathological heterogeneity in schizophrenia is challenging, and previous results remain inconclusive. We employed advanced machine learning to identify a stable and generalizable factorization of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale and used it to identify psychopathological subtypes as well as their neurobiological differentiations.

methodsPositive and Negative Syndrome Scale data from the Pharmacotherapy Monitoring and Outcome Survey cohort (1545 patients; 586 followed up after 1.35 ± 0.70 years) were used for learning the factor structure by an orthonormal projective non-negative factorization. An international sample, pooled from 9 medical centers across Europe, the United States, and Asia (490 patients), was used for validation. Patients were clustered into psychopathological subtypes based on the identified factor structure, and the neurobiological divergence between the subtypes was assessed by classification analysis on functional magnetic resonance imaging connectivity patterns.

resultsA 4-factor structure representing negative, positive, affective, and cognitive symptoms was identified as the most stable and generalizable representation of psychopathology. It showed higher internal consistency than the original Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale subscales and previously proposed factor models. Based on this representation, the positive-negative dichotomy was confirmed as the (only) robust psychopathological subtypes, and these subtypes were longitudinally stable in about 80% of the repeatedly assessed patients. Finally, the individual subtype could be predicted with good accuracy from functional connectivity profiles of the ventromedial frontal cortex, temporoparietal junction, and precuneus.

conclusionsMachine learning applied to multisite data with cross-validation yielded a factorization generalizable across populations and medical systems. Together with subtyping and the demonstrated ability to predict subtype membership from neuroimaging data, this work further disentangles the heterogeneity in schizophrenia.

Indexed as

SchizophreniaBrainEuropeHumansMachine LearningMagnetic Resonance ImagingPsychopathologyBrain imagingMachine learningMultivariate classificationNon-negative factorizationSchizophreniaSubtyping

Identifiers

PMID31748126
PMCPMC6946875

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.