Cited by 173Functional Brain Connectivity StudiesMental Health Research TopicsNeural dynamics and brain function

Dissecting psychiatric spectrum disorders by generative embedding

Open access
Brodersen, Kay H., Deserno, Lorenz, Schlagenhauf, Florian, Lin, Zhihao, Penny, Will D., Buhmann, Joachim M., Stephan, Klaas E.·2014·NeuroImage: Clinical

Abstract

This proof-of-concept study examines the feasibility of defining subgroups in psychiatric spectrum disorders by generative embedding, using dynamical system models which infer neuronal circuit mechanisms from neuroimaging data. To this end, we re-analysed an fMRI dataset of 41 patients diagnosed with schizophrenia and 42 healthy controls performing a numerical n-back working-memory task. In our generative-embedding approach, we used parameter estimates from a dynamic causal model (DCM) of a visual-parietal-prefrontal network to define a model-based feature space for the subsequent application of supervised and unsupervised learning techniques. First, using a linear support vector machine for classification, we were able to predict individual diagnostic labels significantly more accurately (78%) from DCM-based effective connectivity estimates than from functional connectivity between (62%) or local activity within the same regions (55%). Second, an unsupervised approach based on variational Bayesian Gaussian mixture modelling provided evidence for two clusters which mapped onto patients and controls with nearly the same accuracy (71%) as the supervised approach. Finally, when restricting the analysis only to the patients, Gaussian mixture modelling suggested the existence of three patient subgroups, each of which was characterised by a different architecture of the visual-parietal-prefrontal working-memory network. Critically, even though this analysis did not have access to information about the patients' clinical symptoms, the three neurophysiologically defined subgroups mapped onto three clinically distinct subgroups, distinguished by significant differences in negative symptom severity, as assessed on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). In summary, this study provides a concrete example of how psychiatric spectrum diseases may be split into subgroups that are defined in terms of neurophysiological mechanisms specified by a generative model of network dynamics such as DCM. The results corroborate our previous findings in stroke patients that generative embedding, compared to analyses of more conventional measures such as functional connectivity or regional activity, can significantly enhance both the interpretability and performance of computational approaches to clinical classification.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.nicl.2013.11.002

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Generative embedding typically results in substantially higher performance than conventional machine learning when one has a good model, because the model acts as a theory-led feature selection device that retains only dimensions of interest and discards irrelevant data features.

    “provided one has a good model, generative embedding typically results in substantially higher performance since the model is used as a theory-led feature selection device, which retains only dimensions of interest and discards irrelevant data features.”
  • Generative embedding classification or clustering results have a mechanistic interpretation because the dimensions of the feature space are given by specific model parameters.

    “the classification or clustering results have a mechanistic interpretation since the dimensions of the feature space are given by specific model parameters.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 99 · Cited by 173

Authors
Brodersen, K. H., Deserno, L., Schlagenhauf, F., Lin, Z., Penny, W. D., Buhmann, J. M., & Stephan, K. E.
Affiliations
  • University of Zurich (CH)
  • Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences (DE)
  • Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging (GB)
  • ETH Zurich (CH)
Corresponding author
Brodersen, Kay H.
Venue
NeuroImage: Clinical
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014
Volume
4
Pages
98-111
ISSN
2213-1582 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2004695100
Cited by
173
References
99
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 1
FWCI
1.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • NeuroImage Clinical (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Repository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (submittedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • ETH Zürich Research Collection (cc-by)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Funders
  • University Research Priority Program ‘Foundations of Human Social Behaviour’ at the University of Zurich
  • SystemsX.ch project ‘Neurochoice’
  • CRPP ‘Multiple Sclerosis’
  • René and Susanne Braginsky Foundation
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
Keywords
schizophrenia, subgroups, dynamic causal modeling, effective connectivity, working memory, negative symptoms, clinical classification, functional MRI, Gaussian mixture model, support vector machine
MeSH terms
Brain, Humans, Nerve Net, Neural Pathways, Schizophrenia, Reproducibility of Results, Models, Statistical, Case-Control Studies, Nonlinear Dynamics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review