ReviewBrain sciences2024
Increasing the Construct Validity of Computational Phenotypes of Mental Illness Through Active Inference and Brain Imaging.
Review in Brain sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
After more than 30 years since its inception, the utility of brain imaging for understanding and diagnosing mental illnesses is in doubt, receiving well-grounded criticisms from clinical practitioners. Symptom-based correlational approaches have struggled to provide psychiatry with reliable brain-imaging metrics. However, the emergence of computational psychiatry has paved a new path not only for understanding the psychopathology of mental illness but also to provide practical tools for clinical practice in terms of computational metrics, specifically computational phenotypes. However, these phenotypes still lack sufficient test-retest reliability. In this review, we describe recent works revealing that mind and brain-related computational phenotypes show structural (not random) variation over time, longitudinal changes. Furthermore, we show that these findings suggest that understanding the causes of these changes will improve the construct validity of the phenotypes with an ensuing increase in test-retest reliability. We propose that the active inference framework offers a general-purpose approach for causally understanding these longitudinal changes by incorporating brain imaging as observations within partially observable Markov decision processes.
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.