ArticleResearch square2024
Differentiating Biomarker Features and Familial Characteristics of B-SNIP Psychosis Biotypes.
Article in Research square, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Idiopathic psychosis shows considerable biological heterogeneity across cases. B-SNIP used psychosis-relevant biomarkers to identity psychosis Biotypes, which will aid etiological and targeted treatment investigations. Psychosis probands from the B-SNIP consortium (n = 1907), their first-degree biological relatives (n = 705), and healthy participants (n = 895) completed a biomarker battery composed of cognition, saccades, and auditory EEG measurements. ERP quantifications were substantially modified from previous iterations of this approach. Multivariate integration reduced multiple biomarker outcomes to 11 "bio-factors". Twenty-four different approaches indicated bio-factor data among probands were best distributed as three subgroups. Numerical taxonomy with k-means constructed psychosis Biotypes, and rand indices evaluated consistency of Biotype assignments. Psychosis subgroups, their non-psychotic first-degree relatives, and healthy individuals were compared across bio-factors. The three psychosis Biotypes differed significantly on all 11 bio-factors, especially prominent for general cognition, antisaccades, ERP magnitude, and intrinsic neural activity. Rand indices showed excellent consistency of clustering membership when samples included at least 1100 subjects. Canonical discriminant analysis described composite bio-factors that simplified group comparisons and captured neural dysregulation, neural vigor, and stimulus salience variates. Neural dysregulation captured Biotype-2, low neural vigor captured Biotype-1, and deviations of stimulus salience captured Biotype-3. First-degree relatives showed similar patterns as their Biotyped proband relatives on general cognition, antisaccades, ERP magnitudes, and intrinsic brain activity. Results extend previous efforts by the B-SNIP consortium to characterize biologically distinct psychosis Biotypes. They also show that at least 1100 observations are necessary to achieve consistent outcomes. First-degree relative data implicate specific bio-factor deviations to the subtype of their proband and may inform studies of genetic risk.
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.