Transdiagnostic behavioral and genetic contributors to repetitive negative thinking: A machine learning approach

A novel approach to anxiety level prediction using small sets of judgment and survey variables

Anxiety, a condition characterized by intense fear and persistent worry, affects millions each year and, when severe, is distressing and functionally impairing. Numerous machine learning frameworks have been developed and tested to predict features of anxiety and anxiety traits. This study extended these approaches by using a small set of interpretable judgment variables (n = 15) and contextual variables (demographics, perceived loneliness, COVID-19 history) to (1) understand the relationships between these variables and (2) develop a framework to predict anxiety levels [derived from the State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI)]. This set of 15 judgment variables, including loss aversion and risk aversion, models biases in reward/aversion judgments extracted from an unsupervised, short (2-3 min) picture rating task (using the International Affective Picture System) that can be completed on a smartphone. The study cohort consisted of 3476 de-identified adult participants from across the United States who were recruited using an email survey database. Using a balanced Random Forest approach with these judgment and contextual variables, STAI-derived anxiety levels were predicted with up to 81% accuracy and 0.71 AUC ROC. Normalized Gini scores showed that the most important predictors (age, loneliness, household income, employment status) contributed a total of 29-31% of the cumulative relative importance and up to 61% was contributed by judgment variables. Mediation/moderation statistics revealed that the interactions between judgment and contextual variables appears to be important for accurately predicting anxiety levels. Median shifts in judgment variables described a behavioral profile for individuals with higher anxiety levels that was characterized by less resilience, more avoidance, and more indifference behavior. This study supports the hypothesis that distinct constellations of 15 interpretable judgment variables, along with contextual variables, could yield an efficient and highly scalable system for mental health assessment. These results contribute to our understanding of underlying psychological processes that are necessary to characterize what causes variance in anxiety conditions and its behaviors, which can impact treatment development and efficacy.

Precision psychiatry and Research Domain Criteria: Implications for clinical trials and future practice

Psychiatric disorders are associated with significant social and economic burdens, many of which are related to issues with current diagnosis and treatments. The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic is estimated to have increased the prevalence and burden of major depressive and anxiety disorders, indicating an urgent need to strengthen mental health systems globally. To date, current approaches adopted in drug discovery and development for psychiatric disorders have been relatively unsuccessful. Precision psychiatry aims to tailor healthcare more closely to the needs of individual patients and, when informed by neuroscience, can offer the opportunity to improve the accuracy of disease classification, treatment decisions, and prevention efforts. In this review, we highlight the growing global interest in precision psychiatry and the potential for the National Institute of Health-devised Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) to facilitate the implementation of transdiagnostic and improved treatment approaches. The need for current psychiatric nosology to evolve with recent scientific advancements and increase awareness in emerging investigators/clinicians of the value of this approach is essential. Finally, we examine current challenges and future opportunities of adopting the RDoC-associated translational and transdiagnostic approaches in clinical studies, acknowledging that the strength of RDoC is that they form a dynamic framework of guiding principles that is intended to evolve continuously with scientific developments into the future. A collaborative approach that recruits expertise from multiple disciplines, while also considering the patient perspective, is needed to pave the way for precision psychiatry that can improve the prognosis and quality of life of psychiatric patients.

Transdiagnostic phenomena of psychopathology in the context of the RDoC: protocol of a multimodal cross-sectional study

In the past, affective and cognitive processes related to psychopathology have been examined within the boundaries of phenotype-based diagnostic labels, which has led to inconsistent findings regarding their underlying operating principles. Investigating these processes dimensionally in healthy individuals and by means of multiple modalities may provide additional insights into the psychological and neuronal mechanisms at their core. The transdiagnostic phenomena Neuroticism and Rumination are known to be closely linked. However, the exact nature of their relationship remains to be elucidated. The same applies to the associations between Hedonic Capacity, Negativity Bias and different Emotion Regulation strategies.This multimodal cross-sectional study examines the relationship of the transdiagnostic phenomena Neuroticism and Rumination as well as Hedonic Capacity, the Negativity Bias and Emotion Regulation from a RDoC (Research Domain Criteria) perspective. A total of 120 currently healthy subjects (past 12 months) will complete several questionnaires regarding personality, emotion regulation, hedonic capacity, and psychopathologies as well as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) during cognitive and emotional processing, to obtain data on the circuit, behavioral and self-report level.This study aims to contribute to the understanding of the relationship between cognitive and affective processes associated with psychopathologies as well as their neuronal correlates. Ultimately, a grounded understanding of these processes could guide improvement of diagnostic labels and treatments. Limitations include the cross-sectional design and the limited variability in psychopathology scores due to the restriction of the sample to currently healthy subjects.