Back

A Comparative Machine Learning Study of Connectivity-Based Biomarkers of Schizophrenia

Shevchenko, V.; Benn, R. A.; Scholz, R.; Wei, W.; Pallavicini, C.; Klatzmann, U.; Alberti, F.; Satterthwaite, T. D.; Wassermann, D.; Bazin, P.-L.; Margulies, D. S.

2024-01-06 neuroscience
10.1101/2024.01.05.573898 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Functional connectivity holds promise as a biomarker of psychiatric disorders. Yet, its high dimensionality, combined with small sample sizes in clinical research, increases the risk of overfitting when the aim is prediction. Recently, low-dimensional representations of the connectome such as macroscale cortical gradients and gradient dispersion have been proposed, with studies noting consistent gradient and dispersion differences in psychiatric conditions. However, it is unknown which of these derived measures has the highest predictive capacity and how they compare to raw connectivity. Our study evaluates which connectome features -- functional connectivity, gradients, or gradient dispersion -- best identify schizophrenia. Figure 1 summarizes this work. O_FIG O_LINKSMALLFIG WIDTH=200 HEIGHT=41 SRC="FIGDIR/small/573898v1_fig1.gif" ALT="Figure 1"> View larger version (15K): org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@12c0fdorg.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@13c4702org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@59f8d7org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@e00f56_HPS_FORMAT_FIGEXP M_FIG O_FLOATNOFigure 1.C_FLOATNO Overview of the methods and main outcome of the paper. Schematic images: Flaticon.com. NC: neurotypical controls, SCZ: patients with schizophrenia. C_FIG Surprisingly, our findings indicate that functional connectivity outperforms its low-dimensional derivatives such as cortical gradients and gradient dispersion in identifying schizophrenia. Additionally, we demonstrated that the edges which contribute the most to classification performance are the ones connecting primary sensory regions.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.