ArticlePLOS digital health2025
Forecasting mental states in schizophrenia using digital phenotyping data.
Article in PLOS digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Digital phenotyping with large language models to detect depressive state changes in patients.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Application of artificial intelligence in schizophrenia rehabilitation management: a systematic scoping review.Translational psychiatry · 2026Article
- Machine learning helps predict early onset psychosis with serum protein biomarkers, neuropsychometry, and clinicodemographic data.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Efficacy of paliperidone palmitate once-monthly (PP1M) in improving social functioning and reducing caregiver burden in patients with schizophrenia: a six-month follow-up study.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The promise of machine learning successfully exploiting digital phenotyping data to forecast mental states in psychiatric populations could greatly improve clinical practice. Previous research focused on binary classification and continuous regression, disregarding the often ordinal nature of prediction targets derived from clinical rating scales. In addition, mental health ratings typically show important class imbalance or skewness that need to be accounted for when evaluating predictive performance. Besides it remains unclear which machine learning algorithm is best suited for forecast tasks, the eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) and long short-term memory (LSTM) algorithms being 2 popular choices in digital phenotyping studies. The CrossCheck dataset includes 6,364 mental state surveys using 4-point ordinal rating scales and 23,551 days of smartphone sensor data contributed by patients with schizophrenia. We trained 120 machine learning models to forecast 10 mental states (e.g., Calm, Depressed, Seeing things) from passive sensor data on 2 predictive tasks (ordinal regression, binary classification) with 2 learning algorithms (XGBoost, LSTM) over 3 forecast horizons (same day, next day, next week). A majority of ordinal regression and binary classification models performed significantly above baseline, with macro-averaged mean absolute error values between 1.19 and 0.77, and balanced accuracy between 58% and 73%, which corresponds to similar levels of performance when these metrics are scaled. Results also showed that metrics that do not account for imbalance (mean absolute error, accuracy) systematically overestimated performance, XGBoost models performed on par with or better than LSTM models, and a significant yet very small decrease in performance was observed as the forecast horizon expanded. In conclusion, when using performance metrics that properly account for class imbalance, ordinal forecast models demonstrated comparable performance to the prevalent binary classification approach without losing valuable clinical information from self-reports, thus providing richer and easier to interpret predictions.
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.