Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39048987›Full record

ArticleBMC psychiatry2024

Causes of death in individuals with lifetime major depression: a comprehensive machine learning analysis from a community-based autopsy center.

Paula Villela Nunes, Livia Mancine, Beatriz Astolfi Neves, Renata Elaine Paraizo Leite, Camila Nascimento, Carlos Augusto Pasqualucci, Beny Lafer, Rogerio Salvini, Claudia Kimie Suemoto

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

9 authors.

Paula Villela NunesFaculdade de Medicina de Jundiai, rua Francisco Telles, 250, Jundiai, SP, 13202-550, Brazil. paula@formato.com.br.
Livia MancineInstituto de Informatica Universidade Federal de Goias, Alameda Palmeiras, s/n, Goiania, GO, 74690-900, Brazil.
Beatriz Astolfi NevesFaculdade de Medicina de Jundiai, rua Francisco Telles, 250, Jundiai, SP, 13202-550, Brazil.
Renata Elaine Paraizo LeiteFaculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Av. Dr. Arnaldo, 455, Sao Paulo, SP, 01246-903, Brazil.
Camila NascimentoFederal University of Sao Paulo, rua Pedro de Toledo, 669, Sao Paulo, SP, 04039-032, Brazil.
Carlos Augusto PasqualucciFaculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Av. Dr. Arnaldo, 455, Sao Paulo, SP, 01246-903, Brazil.
Beny LaferFaculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Av. Dr. Arnaldo, 455, Sao Paulo, SP, 01246-903, Brazil.
Rogerio SalviniInstituto de Informatica Universidade Federal de Goias, Alameda Palmeiras, s/n, Goiania, GO, 74690-900, Brazil.
Claudia Kimie SuemotoFaculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Av. Dr. Arnaldo, 455, Sao Paulo, SP, 01246-903, Brazil.

Funding

Alzheimer's Association AARF 18-566005Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico 466763/2014-0Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo 2018/16626-0
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDepression can be associated with increased mortality and morbidity, but no studies have investigated the specific causes of death based on autopsy reports. Autopsy studies can yield valuable and detailed information on pathological ailments or underreported conditions. This study aimed to compare autopsy-confirmed causes of death (CoD) between individuals diagnosed with major depressive disorder (MDD) and matched controls. We also analyzed subgroups within our MDD sample, including late-life depression and recurrent depression. We further investigated whether machine learning (ML) algorithms could distinguish MDD and each subgroup from controls based on their CoD.

methodsWe conducted a comprehensive analysis of CoD in individuals who died from nontraumatic causes. The diagnosis of lifetime MDD was ascertained based on the DSM-5 criteria using information from a structured interview with a knowledgeable informant. Eleven established ML algorithms were used to differentiate MDD individuals from controls by simultaneously analyzing different disease category groups to account for multiple tests. The McNemar test was further used to compare paired nominal data.

resultsThe initial dataset included records of 1,102 individuals, among whom 232 (21.1%) had a lifetime diagnosis of MDD. Each MDD individual was strictly paired with a control non-psychiatric counterpart. In the MDD group, the most common CoD were circulatory (67.2%), respiratory (13.4%), digestive (6.0%), and cancer (5.6%). Despite employing a range of ML models, we could not find distinctive CoD patterns that could reliably distinguish individuals with MDD from individuals in the control group (average accuracy: 50.6%; accuracy range: 39-59%). These findings were consistent even when considering factors within the MDD group, such as late-life or recurrent MDD. When comparing groups with paired nominal tests, no differences were found for circulatory (p=0.450), respiratory (p=0.790), digestive (p=1.000), or cancer (p=0.855) CoD.

conclusionsOur analysis revealed that autopsy-confirmed CoD exhibited remarkable similarity between individuals with depression and their matched controls, underscoring the existing heterogeneity in the literature. Future research should prioritize more severe manifestations of depression and larger sample sizes, particularly in the context of CoD related to cancer.

Indexed as

AutopsyCause of DeathMachine LearningMajor Depressive DisorderAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCase-Control StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedAutopsyDeath causeDepressionMachine learningMortality

Identifiers

PMID39048987
PMCPMC11271064

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.