Using Machine Learning and Structural Neuroimaging to Detect First Episode Psychosis: Reconsidering the Evidence.
Adult
Cerebral Cortex
/ diagnostic imaging
Datasets as Topic
Deep Learning
/ standards
Female
Gray Matter
/ diagnostic imaging
Humans
Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted
/ standards
Machine Learning
/ standards
Male
Neuroimaging
/ standards
Pattern Recognition, Automated
/ standards
Psychotic Disorders
/ diagnostic imaging
Reproducibility of Results
Young Adult
psychosis
multivariate pattern recognition/classification
neuroimaging/multi-site
Journal
Schizophrenia bulletin
ISSN: 1745-1701
Titre abrégé: Schizophr Bull
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0236760
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 01 2020
04 01 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
28
2
2019
medline:
9
2
2021
entrez:
28
2
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Despite the high level of interest in the use of machine learning (ML) and neuroimaging to detect psychosis at the individual level, the reliability of the findings is unclear due to potential methodological issues that may have inflated the existing literature. This study aimed to elucidate the extent to which the application of ML to neuroanatomical data allows detection of first episode psychosis (FEP), while putting in place methodological precautions to avoid overoptimistic results. We tested both traditional ML and an emerging approach known as deep learning (DL) using 3 feature sets of interest: (1) surface-based regional volumes and cortical thickness, (2) voxel-based gray matter volume (GMV) and (3) voxel-based cortical thickness (VBCT). To assess the reliability of the findings, we repeated all analyses in 5 independent datasets, totaling 956 participants (514 FEP and 444 within-site matched controls). The performance was assessed via nested cross-validation (CV) and cross-site CV. Accuracies ranged from 50% to 70% for surfaced-based features; from 50% to 63% for GMV; and from 51% to 68% for VBCT. The best accuracies (70%) were achieved when DL was applied to surface-based features; however, these models generalized poorly to other sites. Findings from this study suggest that, when methodological precautions are adopted to avoid overoptimistic results, detection of individuals in the early stages of psychosis is more challenging than originally thought. In light of this, we argue that the current evidence for the diagnostic value of ML and structural neuroimaging should be reconsidered toward a more cautious interpretation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30809667
pii: 5365736
doi: 10.1093/schbul/sby189
pmc: PMC6942152
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
17-26Subventions
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MC_PC_11003
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : MRF
ID : MRF_C0439
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
ID : 208519/Z/17/Z
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Maryland Psychiatric Research Center.
Références
Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2012 Sep;21(3):205-21
pubmed: 22419500
Schizophr Bull. 2015 Nov;41(6):1266-75
pubmed: 26264820
Psychol Med. 2013 Dec;43(12):2547-62
pubmed: 23507081
Neuropsychopharmacology. 2015 Jun;40(7):1742-51
pubmed: 25601228
Transl Psychiatry. 2012 Nov 20;2:e190
pubmed: 23168990
Psychiatry Res Neuroimaging. 2018 May 30;275:14-20
pubmed: 29548527
Sci Rep. 2016 Dec 12;6:38897
pubmed: 27941946
Neuroimage. 2007 Oct 15;38(1):95-113
pubmed: 17761438
Neuroimage. 2017 Jul 15;155:549-564
pubmed: 28456584
Br J Psychiatry. 2009 Dec;195(6):488-91
pubmed: 19949195
Nat Neurosci. 2017 Feb 23;20(3):365-377
pubmed: 28230847
Neuroimage. 2009 Mar;45(1 Suppl):S199-209
pubmed: 19070668
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2011 Apr;35(5):1175-85
pubmed: 21168439
Neuroimage Clin. 2016 Jun 03;12:1-15
pubmed: 27354958
Biol Psychiatry. 2016 Oct 1;80(7):552-61
pubmed: 26927419
Schizophr Bull. 2018 Aug 20;44(5):1035-1044
pubmed: 29186619
Front Neurosci. 2012 Dec 13;6:178
pubmed: 23248579
Neuroimage. 2017 Jul 15;155:10-24
pubmed: 28428048
Nature. 2015 May 28;521(7553):436-44
pubmed: 26017442
Neuroimage. 2008 May 1;40(4):1701-10
pubmed: 18325790
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2010 Jul;34(8):1207-22
pubmed: 20144653
Schizophr Bull. 2013 Sep;39(5):1105-14
pubmed: 22969150
Neuroimage. 2018 Oct 15;180(Pt A):68-77
pubmed: 28655633
Schizophr Res. 2019 Dec;214:11-17
pubmed: 29208422
Mol Psychiatry. 2016 Apr;21(4):547-53
pubmed: 26033243
Schizophr Bull. 2018 Aug 20;44(5):939-941
pubmed: 29986110
Early Interv Psychiatry. 2008 Aug;2(3):178-87
pubmed: 21352151
Psychol Med. 2009 Nov;39(11):1763-77
pubmed: 19338710
BMC Bioinformatics. 2006 Feb 23;7:91
pubmed: 16504092
Schizophr Res. 2019 Dec;214:34-42
pubmed: 29074332
Neuroimage Clin. 2013 Sep 13;3:279-89
pubmed: 24273713
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005 Nov;62(11):1218-27
pubmed: 16275809
PLoS One. 2017 Apr 20;12(4):e0175683
pubmed: 28426817
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2012 Apr;36(4):1140-52
pubmed: 22305994
Neuroimage. 2009 Nov 1;48(2):371-80
pubmed: 19559801
Front Psychiatry. 2016 Mar 31;7:50
pubmed: 27064972
Neuroimage. 2012 Jul 2;61(3):606-12
pubmed: 22507227
Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging. 2018 Sep;3(9):798-808
pubmed: 29789268
Biol Psychiatry. 2018 Nov 1;84(9):644-654
pubmed: 29960671
Neuroimage. 2017 Jan 15;145(Pt B):137-165
pubmed: 27012503
Neuroimage. 2012 Aug 15;62(2):774-81
pubmed: 22248573
Schizophr Res. 2011 Apr;127(1-3):46-57
pubmed: 21300524
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2017 Mar;74(Pt A):58-75
pubmed: 28087243
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2015 Oct;57:328-49
pubmed: 26254595
Schizophr Bull. 2011 Jan;37(1):177-88
pubmed: 19633214
Schizophr Res. 2019 Dec;214:3-10
pubmed: 29274736
Biol Psychiatry. 2015 Sep 15;78(6):403-12
pubmed: 25802081
Front Neurosci. 2014 Aug 20;8:229
pubmed: 25191215