ArticleJournal of affective disorders2026
Data diversity vs. model complexity in the prediction of pediatric bipolar disorder: Evidence from academic and community clinical samples.
Article in Journal of affective disorders, 2026. 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
- Update of
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pediatric bipolar disorder is challenging to diagnose accurately due to symptom heterogeneity. More standardized and data-driven approaches are needed to enhance diagnostic reliability. We evaluated a clinical decision tool (nomogram), statistical methods (logistic regression, LASSO), machine learning (support vector machine, random forest, k-nearest neighbors, extreme gradient boosting), and deep learning (multilayer perceptron) for pediatric bipolar disorder prediction across two datasets collected in academic (N = 550) and community (N = 511) clinical settings. We compared three modeling strategies: cross-dataset validation, cross-dataset with interaction terms, and pooled-dataset. We assessed model performance using discrimination, calibration, and predictor importance ranking. In the baseline cross-dataset approach, all models showed good internal discrimination in the academic dataset, but external discrimination in the community dataset substantially declined. Interaction-enhanced models slightly improved internal discrimination but not external performance or calibration. Recalibration substantially improved cross-dataset calibration. Models trained on the pooled sample showed strong performance on held-out samples drawn from the heterogeneous pooled cohort, with good calibration for most models. Across models and training strategies, PGBI-10M was consistently identified as the most important predictor. Predictive models for pediatric bipolar disorder showed strong internal performance but limited cross-setting generalizability due to dataset shift and miscalibration. Within the present study, increasing model complexity did not improve external performance, whereas training on pooled data improved performance on held-out samples from the heterogeneous pooled cohort. These findings suggest that training-data diversity may provide greater practical benefit than increasing model complexity for developing robust psychiatric prediction models, underscoring the importance of open and collaborative datasets.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42600789What 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.