ArticleHuman brain mapping2025
Using Extreme Value Statistics to Reconceptualize Psychopathology as Extreme Deviations From a Normative Reference Model.
Article in Human brain mapping, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Using Extreme Value Statistics to Reconceptualize Psychopathology as Extreme Deviations From a Normative Reference Model.Human brain mapping · 2025Article
- Spectral normative modeling of brain structure.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
For many problems in neuroimaging, the most informative features occur in the tail of the distribution. For example, when considering psychiatric disorders as deviations from a 'norm', the tails of the distribution are considerably more informative than the bulk of the distribution for understanding risk, stratifying and predicting such disorders, and for anomaly detection. Yet, most statistical methods used in neuroimaging focus on modeling the bulk and fail to adequately capture extreme values occurring in the tails. To address this, we propose a framework that combines normative models with multivariate extreme value statistics to accurately model extreme deviations of a reference cohort for individual participants. Normative models are now widely used in clinical neuroscience and similar to the employment of normative growth charts in pediatric medicine to track a child's weight in relation to their age; normative models can be used with neuroimaging measurements to quantify individual neurophenotypic deviations from a reference cohort. However, formal statistical treatment of how to model the extreme deviations from these models has been lacking until now. In this article, we provide such an approach inspired by applications of extreme value statistics in meteorology. Since the presentation of extreme value statistics is quite technical, we begin with a non-technical introduction to the fundamental principles of extreme value statistics to accurately map the tails of the normative distribution for biological markers, including mapping multivariate tail dependence across multiple markers. Next, we give a demonstration of this approach to the UK Biobank dataset and demonstrate how extreme values can be used to accurately estimate risk and detect atypicality. This framework provides a valuable tool for the statistical modeling of extreme deviations in neurobiological data, which could provide us with more accurate and effective diagnostic tools for neurological and psychiatric disorders.
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.