ArticlePsychiatry and clinical neurosciences2025
Understanding heterogeneity in psychiatric disorders: A method for identifying subtypes and parsing comorbidity.
Article in Psychiatry and clinical neurosciences, 2025. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimMost psychiatric and neurodevelopmental disorders are heterogeneous. Neural abnormalities in patients might differ in magnitude and kind, giving rise to distinct subtypes that can be partly overlapping (comorbidity). Identifying disorder-related individual differences is challenging due to the overwhelming presence of disorder-unrelated variation shared with healthy controls. Recently, Contrastive Variational Autoencoders (CVAEs) have been shown to separate disorder-related individual variation from disorder-unrelated variation. However, it is not known if CVAEs can also satisfy the other key desiderata for psychiatric research: capturing disease subtypes and disentangling comorbidity. In this paper, we compare CVAEs to other methods as a function of hyperparameters, such as model size and training data availability. We also introduce a new architecture for modeling comorbid disorders and test a novel training procedure for CVAEs that improves their reproducibility.
methodsWe use synthetic neuroanatomical MRI data with known ground truth for shared and disorder-specific effects and study the performance of the CVAE and non-contrastive baseline models at detecting disorder-subtypes and disentangling comorbidity in brain images varying along shared and disorder-specific dimensions.
resultsCVAE models consistently outperformed non-contrastive alternatives as measured by correlation with disorder-specific ground truth effects and accuracy of subtype discovery. The CVAE also successfully disentangled neuroanatomical loci of comorbid disorders, due to its novel architecture. Improved training procedure reduced variability in the results by up to 5.5×.
conclusionThe results showcase how the CVAE can be used as an overall framework in precision psychiatry studies, enabling reliable detection of interpretable neuromarkers, discovering disorder subtypes and disentangling comorbidity.
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.