Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33714090›Full record

ArticlePsychiatry research. Neuroimaging2021

Brain age prediction in schizophrenia: Does the choice of machine learning algorithm matter?

Won Hee Lee, Mathilde Antoniades, Hugo G Schnack, Rene S Kahn, Sophia Frangou

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychiatry research. Neuroimaging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. BrainAGE, brain health, and mental disorders: A systematic review.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  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

5 authors.

Won Hee LeeDepartment of Software Convergence, Kyung Hee University, Yongin, Republic of Korea.
Mathilde AntoniadesDepartment of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, 1425 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 20019, United States.
Hugo G SchnackDepartment of Psychiatry, UMCU Brain Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, Netherlands.
Rene S KahnDepartment of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, 1425 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 20019, United States.
Sophia FrangouDepartment of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, 1425 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 20019, United States; Department of Psychiatry, Djavad Mowafaghian Centre for Brain Health, University of British Columbia, Canada. Electronic address: sophia.frangou@mssm.edu.

Funding

Brain connectivity and the role of myelin in PsychosisR01MH113619 · NIMH · ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI · PI FRANGOU, SOPHIA · 2018 to 2021
$2.5M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH113619
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Brain-predicted age difference (brainPAD) has been used in schizophrenia to assess individual-level deviation in the biological age of the patients' brain (i.e., brain-age) from normative reference brain structural datasets. There is marked inter-study variation in brainPAD in schizophrenia which is commonly attributed to sample heterogeneity. However, the potential contribution of the different machine learning algorithms used for brain-age estimation has not been systematically evaluated. Here, we aimed to assess variation in brain-age estimated by six commonly used algorithms [ordinary least squares regression, ridge regression, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression, elastic-net regression, linear support vector regression, and relevance vector regression] when applied to the same brain structural features from the same sample. To assess reproducibility we used data from two publically available samples of healthy individuals (n = 1092 and n = 492) and two further samples, from the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (ISMMS) and the Center of Biomedical Research Excellence (COBRE), comprising both patients with schizophrenia (n = 90 and n = 76) and healthy individuals (n = 200 and n = 87). Performance similarity across algorithms was compared within each sample using correlation analyses and hierarchical clustering. Across all samples ordinary least squares regression, the only algorithm without a penalty term, performed markedly worse. All other algorithms showed comparable performance but they still yielded variable brain-age estimates despite being applied to the same data. Although brainPAD was consistently higher in patients with schizophrenia, it varied by algorithm from 3.8 to 5.2 years in the ISMMS sample and from to 4.5 to 11.7 years in the COBRE sample. Algorithm choice introduces variations in brain-age and may confound inter-study comparisons when assessing brainPAD in schizophrenia.

Indexed as

SchizophreniaAlgorithmsBrainHumansMachine LearningReproducibility of ResultsBrain age predictionMachine learningRegressionSchizophreniaStructural MRI

Identifiers

PMID33714090
PMCPMC8056405

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.