ArticleResearch square2024
Classification of Schizophrenia, Bipolar Disorder and Major Depressive Disorder with Comorbid Traits and Deep Learning Algorithms.
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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recent GWASs have demonstrated that comorbid disorders share genetic liabilities. But whether and how these shared liabilities can be used for the classification and differentiation of comorbid disorders remains unclear. In this study, we use polygenic risk scores (PRSs) estimated from 42 comorbid traits and the deep neural networks (DNN) architecture to classify and differentiate schizophrenia (SCZ), bipolar disorder (BIP) and major depressive disorder (MDD). Multiple PRSs were obtained for individuals from the schizophrenia (SCZ) (cases = 6,317, controls = 7,240), bipolar disorder (BIP) (cases = 2,634, controls 4,425) and major depressive disorder (MDD) (cases = 1,704, controls = 3,357) datasets, and classification models were constructed with and without the inclusion of PRSs of the target (SCZ, BIP or MDD). Models with the inclusion of target PRSs performed well as expected. Surprisingly, we found that SCZ could be classified with only the PRSs from 35 comorbid traits (not including the target SCZ and directly related traits) (accuracy 0.760 ± 0.007, AUC 0.843 ± 0.005). Similar results were obtained for BIP (33 traits, accuracy 0.768 ± 0.007, AUC 0.848 ± 0.009), and MDD (36 traits, accuracy 0.794 ± 0.010, AUC 0.869 ± 0.004). Furthermore, these PRSs from comorbid traits alone could effectively differentiate unaffected controls, SCZ, BIP, and MDD patients (average categorical accuracy 0.861 ± 0.003, average AUC 0.961 ± 0.041). These results suggest that the shared liabilities from comorbid traits alone may be sufficient to classify SCZ, BIP and MDD. More importantly, these results imply that a data-driven and objective diagnosis and differentiation of SCZ, BIP and MDD may be feasible.
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.