ArticleHeliyon2022
Decision tree distinguish affective disorder diagnosis from psychotic disorder diagnosis with clinical and lab factors.
Article in Heliyon, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Machine learning for immune biomarkers in severe mental illness: a systematic review.Neuroscience applied · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Affective symptoms usually occur at the same time of psychotic symptoms. An effective predictive method would help the differential diagnosis at an early stage of the mental disorder. The purpose of the study was to establish a predictive model by using laboratory indexes and clinical factors to improve the diagnostic accuracy. Methods: Subjects were patients diagnosed with psychiatric disorders with affective and/or psychotic symptoms. Two patient samples were collected in the study (n = 309) With three classification methods (logistic regression, decision tree, and discriminant analysis), we established the models and verified the models. Results: Seven predictors were found to be significant to distinguish the affective disorder diagnosis from the psychotic disorder diagnosis in all three methods, the 7 factors were Activities of daily living, direct bilirubin, apolipoproteinA1, lactic dehydrogenase, creatinine, monocyte count and interleukin-8. The decision tree outperformed the other 2 methods in area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, and also had the highest percentage of correctly classification. Conclusion: We established a predictive model that included activities of daily living, biochemical, and immune indicators. In addition, the model established by the decision tree method had the highest predictive power, which provided a reliable basis for future clinical work. Our work would help make diagnosis more accurate at an early stage of the disorder.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.