From multivariate methods to an AI ecosystem

Whole Person Modeling: a transdisciplinary approach to mental health research

The growing global burden of mental illness has prompted calls for innovative research strategies. Theoretical models of mental health include complex contributions of biological, psychosocial, experiential, and other environmental influences. Accordingly, neuropsychiatric research has self-organized into largely isolated disciplines working to decode each individual contribution. However, research directly modeling objective biological measurements in combination with cognitive, psychological, demographic, or other environmental measurements is only now beginning to proliferate. This review aims to (1) to describe the landscape of modern mental health research and current movement towards integrative study, (2) to provide a concrete framework for quantitative integrative research, which we call Whole Person Modeling, (3) to explore existing and emerging techniques and methods used in Whole Person Modeling, and (4) to discuss our observations about the scarcity, potential value, and untested aspects of highly transdisciplinary research in general. Whole Person Modeling studies have the potential to provide a better understanding of multilevel phenomena, deliver more accurate diagnostic and prognostic tests to aid in clinical decision making, and test long standing theoretical models of mental illness. Some current barriers to progress include challenges with interdisciplinary communication and collaboration, systemic cultural barriers to transdisciplinary career paths, technical challenges in model specification, bias, and data harmonization, and gaps in transdisciplinary educational programs. We hope to ease anxiety in the field surrounding the often mysterious and intimidating world of transdisciplinary, data-driven mental health research and provide a useful orientation for students or highly specialized researchers who are new to this area.

Quantifying Deviations of Brain Structure and Function in Major Depressive Disorder Across Neuroimaging Modalities

IMPORTANCE

Identifying neurobiological differences between patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and healthy individuals has been a mainstay of clinical neuroscience for decades. However, recent meta-analyses have raised concerns regarding the replicability and clinical relevance of brain alterations in depression.

OBJECTIVE

To quantify the upper bounds of univariate effect sizes, estimated predictive utility, and distributional dissimilarity of healthy individuals and those with depression across structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), diffusion-tensor imaging, and functional task-based as well as resting-state MRI, and to compare results with an MDD polygenic risk score (PRS) and environmental variables.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This was a cross-sectional, case-control clinical neuroimaging study. Data were part of the Marburg-Münster Affective Disorders Cohort Study. Patients with depression and healthy controls were recruited from primary care and the general population in Münster and Marburg, Germany. Study recruitment was performed from September 11, 2014, to September 26, 2018. The sample comprised patients with acute and chronic MDD as well as healthy controls in the age range of 18 to 65 years. Data were analyzed from October 29, 2020, to April 7, 2022.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Primary analyses included univariate partial effect size (η2), classification accuracy, and distributional overlapping coefficient for healthy individuals and those with depression across neuroimaging modalities, controlling for age, sex, and additional modality-specific confounding variables. Secondary analyses included patient subgroups for acute or chronic depressive status.

RESULTS

A total of 1809 individuals (861 patients [47.6%] and 948 controls [52.4%]) were included in the analysis (mean [SD] age, 35.6 [13.2] years; 1165 female patients [64.4%]). The upper bound of the effect sizes of the single univariate measures displaying the largest group difference ranged from partial η2 of 0.004 to 0.017, and distributions overlapped between 87% and 95%, with classification accuracies ranging between 54% and 56% across neuroimaging modalities. This pattern remained virtually unchanged when considering either only patients with acute or chronic depression. Differences were comparable with those found for PRS but substantially smaller than for environmental variables.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Results of this case-control study suggest that even for maximum univariate biological differences, deviations between patients with MDD and healthy controls were remarkably small, single-participant prediction was not possible, and similarity between study groups dominated. Biological psychiatry should facilitate meaningful outcome measures or predictive approaches to increase the potential for a personalization of the clinical practice.

Two subtypes of schizophrenia identified by an individual-level atypical pattern of tensor-based morphometric measurement

Difficulties in parsing the multiaspect heterogeneity of schizophrenia (SCZ) based on current nosology highlight the need to subtype SCZ using objective biomarkers. Here, utilizing a large-scale multisite SCZ dataset, we identified and validated 2 neuroanatomical subtypes with individual-level abnormal patterns of the tensor-based morphometric measurement. Remarkably, compared with subtype 1, which showed moderate deficits of some subcortical nuclei and an enlarged striatum and cerebellum, subtype 2, which showed cerebellar atrophy and more severe subcortical nuclei atrophy, had a higher subscale score of negative symptoms, which is considered to be a core aspect of SCZ and is associated with functional outcome. Moreover, with the neuroimaging-clinic association analysis, we explored the detailed relationship between the heterogeneity of clinical symptoms and the heterogeneous abnormal neuroanatomical patterns with respect to the 2 subtypes. And the neuroimaging-transcription association analysis highlighted several potential heterogeneous biological factors that may underlie the subtypes. Our work provided an effective framework for investigating the heterogeneity of SCZ from multilevel aspects and may provide new insights for precision psychiatry.

Digital Biomarkers in Psychiatric Research: Data Protection Qualifications in a Complex Ecosystem

Psychiatric research traditionally relies on subjective observation, which is time-consuming and labor-intensive. The widespread use of digital devices, such as smartphones and wearables, enables the collection and use of vast amounts of user-generated data as "digital biomarkers." These tools may also support increased participation of psychiatric patients in research and, as a result, the production of research results that are meaningful to them. However, sharing mental health data and research results may expose patients to discrimination and stigma risks, thus discouraging participation. To earn and maintain participants' trust, the first essential requirement is to implement an appropriate data governance system with a clear and transparent allocation of data protection duties and responsibilities among the actors involved in the process. These include sponsors, investigators, operators of digital tools, as well as healthcare service providers and biobanks/databanks. While previous works have proposed practical solutions to this end, there is a lack of consideration of positive data protection law issues in the extant literature. To start filling this gap, this paper discusses the GDPR legal qualifications of controller, processor, and joint controllers in the complex ecosystem unfolded by the integration of digital biomarkers in psychiatric research, considering their implications and proposing some general practical recommendations.