ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2025
Biomarker signatures as predictors of future impulsivity in schizophrenia: a multi-center study.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: While clinical scales for impulsivity assessment in psychiatric settings are widely used, evidence linking laboratory biomarkers to impulsivity remains limited. This study evaluated the prognostic value of routinely collected biomarkers for future impulsivity risk and developed a machine learning-based prediction model. Methods: We analyzed data from 1,496 first-admission schizophrenia (SCZ) patients across four specialized psychiatric hospitals (2016-2023). A total of 99 features, including 91 routinely tested biomarker measurements, four treatment-related indicators, and four demographic or psychometric variables, were evaluated. Impulsivity was assessed using the Impulsive Behavior Risk Assessment Scale within one week of admission. Five machine learning models were trained with 10-fold cross-validation (n=993) and externally validated in an independent cohort (n=503). Model performance was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), and biomarker importance was evaluated using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP). Results: Of 1,496 SCZ patients, 882 (59.0%) exhibited high impulsivity. CatBoost outperformed other models, achieving an AUROC of 0.749 in cross-validation and 0.719 in external testing. SHAP values identified key biomarkers, revealing heterogeneous response patterns for uric acid (UA), globulin (GLO), apolipoprotein E (APOE), and others. Combining biomarkers with clinical data improved prediction, increasing AUROC from 0.652 to 0.749 in cross-validation and from 0.655 to 0.721 in external testing. Subgroup analyses revealed sex-specific patterns, with exploratory analysis suggesting sex-modified relationships between UA and impulsivity. Discussion: These findings highlight the utility of routine biomarkers for early identification of high-risk individuals with SCZ and suggest the importance of incorporating sex-specific factors in predictive modeling.
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.