ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2025
Diagnosing schizophrenia with routine blood tests: a comparative analysis of machine learning algorithms.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 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.
- Differentiating Alcohol and Substance Use Disorders Using Multiclass Machine Learning Models Based on Routine Hemogram Parameters.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Psychological decoupling in responses to AI: emotional reactivity and behavioral discourse in digital environments.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence-based diagnostic model for schizophrenia in individuals living with HIV.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- The role of cognitive function in predicting metabolic risk in schizophrenia: a multi-model comparison incorporating clinical features.Frontiers in 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Schizophrenia is a severe mental disorder affecting approximately 1% of the general population, diagnosed primarily using clinical criteria. Due to the lack of objective diagnostic methods and reliable biomarkers, accurate diagnosis and effective treatment remain challenging. Peripheral blood biomarkers have recently attracted attention, and machine learning methods offer promising analytical capabilities to enhance diagnostic accuracy. Methods: This retrospective, case-control study included 203 schizophrenia patients treated over a five-year period at a tertiary hospital and 192 age- and sex-matched healthy controls. Demographic data and routine hematological and biochemical parameters were extracted from medical records. Variables missing more than 85% of data were excluded; remaining missing values were imputed after train-test splitting to avoid data leakage. Optimal biomarker subsets were selected using Grey Wolf Optimization (GWO). Random Forest (RF), XGBoost, Support Vector Machine (SVM), K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN), and Logistic Regression (LR) models were trained and evaluated via stratified 10-fold cross-validation. Results: Groups were homogeneous in terms of age and sex. Before GWO optimization, XGBoost (95.55%) and Random Forest (94.63%) yielded the highest accuracies. Following optimization, Random Forest accuracy improved (94.95%) with a recall of 96.25%, while XGBoost reached the highest accuracy (95.90%) and strong specificity (95.54%). Post-optimization, Area Under the Curve (AUC) values were highest for XGBoost (0.96) and Random Forest (0.95), indicating strong diagnostic performance. Total protein, glucose, iron, creatine kinase, total bilirubin, uric acid, calcium, and sodium were key biomarkers distinguishing schizophrenia. Interestingly, glucose levels were significantly lower in schizophrenia patients compared to controls, contrary to typical findings. Differences in triglycerides, liver enzymes, sodium, and potassium lacked clear clinical significance. Discussion: The machine learning models developed provided diagnostic accuracy comparable to studies utilizing more expensive biomarkers, highlighting potential clinical and economic advantages. External validation is recommended to further confirm the generalizability and clinical utility of these findings.
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.