ArticleNeuroscience applied2024
A machine learning pipeline for efficient differentiation between bipolar and major depressive disorder based on multimodal structural neuroimaging.
Article in Neuroscience applied, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- AI at the Bedside of Psychiatry: Comparative Meta-Analysis of Imaging vs. Non-Imaging Models for Bipolar vs. Unipolar Depression.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Improving the diagnosis of bipolar disorder through machine learning - when is the time right?Neuroscience applied · 2025Article
- ADHD detection based on human action recognition.Neuroscience applied · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Due to the overlapping depressive symptomatology with major depressive disorder (MDD), 60% of patients with bipolar disorder (BD) are initially misdiagnosed, calling for the definition of reliable biomarkers that can support the diagnostic process. Here, we optimized a machine learning pipeline for the differentiation between depressed BD and MDD patients based on multimodal structural neuroimaging features. Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) and T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data were acquired for 282 depressed BD (n = 180) and MDD (n = 102) patients. Images were preprocessed to obtain axial (AD), radial (RD), mean (MD) diffusivity, fractional anisotropy (FA), and voxel-based morphometry (VBM) maps. Each feature was entered separately into a 5-fold nested cross-validated predictive pipeline differentiating between BD and MDD patients, comprising: confound regression for nuisance variables removal, feature standardization, principal component analysis for feature reduction, and an elastic-net penalized regression. The DTI-based models reached accuracies ranging from 75% to 78%, whereas the VBM model reached 61% of accuracy. All the models were significantly different from a null model distribution at a 5000-permutation test. A 5000 bootstrap procedure revealed that widespread differences drove the classification, with BD patients associated to overall higher values of AD and FA, and grey matter volumes. Our results suggest that structural neuroimaging, in particular white matter microstructure and grey matter volumes, may be able to differentiate between MDD and BD patients with good predictive accuracy, being significantly higher than chance-level.
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.