Psychiatry and Clinical Psychobiology, Division of Neuroscience, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milano, Italy; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milano, Italy.
Psychiatry and Clinical Psychobiology, Division of Neuroscience, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milano, Italy; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milano, Italy.
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2022 Apr;135:104552. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2022.104552. Epub 2022 Feb 2.
Applying machine learning (ML) to objective markers may overcome prognosis uncertainty due to the subjective nature of the diagnosis of bipolar disorder (BD). This PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis provides new systematic evidence of the BD classification accuracy reached by different markers and ML algorithms. We focused on neuroimaging, electrophysiological techniques, peripheral biomarkers, genetic data, neuropsychological or clinical measures, and multimodal approaches. PubMed, Embase and Scopus were searched through 3rd December 2020. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effect models. Overall, 81 studies were included in this systematic review and 65 in the meta-analysis (11,336 participants, 3903 BD). The overall pooled classification accuracy was 0.77 (95%CI[0.75;0.80]). Despite subgroup analyses for diagnostic comparison group, psychiatric disorders, marker, ML algorithm, and validation procedure were not significant, linear discriminant analysis significantly outperformed support vector machine for peripheral biomarkers (p = 0.03). Sample size was inversely related to accuracy. Evidence of publication bias was detected. Ultimately, although ML reached a high accuracy in differentiating BD from other psychiatric disorders, best practices in methodology are needed for the advancement of future studies.
应用机器学习(ML)于客观标志物可能克服由于双相情感障碍(BD)诊断的主观性而导致的预后不确定性。这项符合 PRISMA 标准的荟萃分析提供了新的系统证据,证明了不同标志物和 ML 算法在 BD 分类中的准确性。我们专注于神经影像学、电生理学技术、外周生物标志物、遗传数据、神经心理学或临床测量以及多模态方法。通过 2020 年 12 月 3 日检索了 PubMed、Embase 和 Scopus。使用随机效应模型进行了荟萃分析。总体而言,本系统评价纳入了 81 项研究,荟萃分析纳入了 65 项研究(11336 名参与者,3903 名 BD)。总体分类准确性为 0.77(95%CI[0.75;0.80])。尽管针对诊断比较组、精神障碍、标志物、ML 算法和验证程序进行了亚组分析,但线性判别分析在区分外周生物标志物方面明显优于支持向量机(p=0.03)。样本量与准确性呈负相关。检测到存在发表偏倚的证据。最终,尽管 ML 在区分 BD 与其他精神障碍方面达到了较高的准确性,但需要在方法学方面采取最佳实践,以推进未来的研究。