Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36395144›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Identifying psychiatric diagnosis from missing mood data through the use of log-signature features.

Yue Wu, Guy M Goodwin, Terry Lyons, Kate E A Saunders

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Yue WuMathematical Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-6281-2229
Guy M GoodwinDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Terry LyonsMathematical Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, United States of America.
Kate E A SaundersDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.

Funding

Department of HealthWellcome TrustWellcome Trust 102,616/ZWellcome Trust 98,461/Z/12/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The availability of mobile technologies has enabled the efficient collection of prospective longitudinal, ecologically valid self-reported clinical questionnaires from people with psychiatric diagnoses. These data streams have potential for improving the efficiency and accuracy of psychiatric diagnosis as well predicting future mood states enabling earlier intervention. However, missing responses are common in such datasets and there is little consensus as to how these should be dealt with in practice. In this study, the missing-response-incorporated log-signature method achieves roughly 74.8% correct diagnosis, with f1 scores for three diagnostic groups 66% (bipolar disorder), 83% (healthy control) and 75% (borderline personality disorder) respectively. This was superior to the naive model which excluded missing data and advanced models which implemented different imputation approaches, namely, k-nearest neighbours (KNN), probabilistic principal components analysis (PPCA) and random forest-based multiple imputation by chained equations (rfMICE). The log-signature method provided an effective approach to the analysis of prospectively collected mood data where missing data was common and should be considered as an approach in other similar datasets. Because of treating missing responses as a signal, its superiority also highlights that missing data conveys valuable clinical information.

Indexed as

AffectBipolar DisorderHumansPrincipal Component AnalysisProspective StudiesResearch Design

Identifiers

PMID36395144
PMCPMC9671309

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.