Cited by 370Treatment of Major DepressionFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesBipolar Disorder and Treatment

Machine learning in major depression: from classification to treatment outcome prediction

Open access
Gao, Shuang, Calhoun, Vince D., Sui, Jing·2018·CNS Neuroscience & Therapeutics

Abstract

Aims: Major depression disorder (MDD) is the single greatest cause of disability and morbidity, and affects about 10% of the population worldwide. Currently, there are no clinically useful diagnostic biomarkers that are able to confirm a diagnosis of MDD from bipolar disorder (BD) in the early depressive episode. Therefore, exploring translational biomarkers of mood disorders based on machine learning is in pressing need, though it is challenging, but with great potential to improve our understanding of these disorders. Discussions: In this study, we review popular machine‐learning methods used for brain imaging classification and predictions, and provide an overview of studies, specifically for MDD, that have used magnetic resonance imaging data to either (a) classify MDDs from controls or other mood disorders or (b) investigate treatment outcome predictors for individual patients. Finally, challenges, future directions, and potential limitations related to MDD biomarker identification are also discussed, with a goal of offering a comprehensive overview that may help readers to better understand the applications of neuroimaging data mining in depression. Conclusions: We hope such efforts may highlight the need for an urgently needed paradigm shift in treatment, to guide personalized optimal clinical care.

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 · 10.1111/cns.13048

Cites

148 of 148 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • The classifiers used in this study have previously been shown to successfully predict clinical features in an MDD sample.

    “The classifiers used in this study have previously been shown to successfully being able to predict clinical features in an MDD sample (Gao et al., 2018; Guo et al., 2012; Nakano et al., 2020; Sacchet et al., 2015; Schmaal et al., 2015; Yan et al., 2020).”

    From Understanding and predicting future relapse in depression from resting state functional connectivity and self-referential processing (2023) · cites this paper as Gao et al., 2018

    The review’s section on treatment-response prediction describes MRI-based machine learning in MDD patients, including a study that predicted a change in depression-rating scores. Its research overview also discusses classifiers used across MDD studies. But the cited paper does not establish that the particular classifiers used in the citing study previously predicted clinical features; it supports only the broader point that some machine-learning methods have done so. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. [97]Hall MA, and Smith LA, “ Practical feature subset selection for machine learning,” Springer, 1998.
  2. [102]Hsu C, Chang C, and Lin C, “ A Practical Guide to Support Vector Classication,” Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems, 2008.
  3. [104]Elisseeff A, and Pontil M, “ Lcavc-onc-out error and stability of learning algorithms w ith applications.”. Advances in Learning Theory: Methods, Models and Applications, Vol. 190, 2002.
  4. [106]Bibi S, and Stamelos I, Selecting the Appropriate Machine Learning Techniques for the Prediction of Software Development Costs: Springer US, 2006.
  5. [108]Kotthoff L, Gent IP, and Miguel I, “ An evaluation of machine learning in algorithm selection for search problems,” Ai Communications, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 257– 270, 2011.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gao, S., Calhoun, V. D., & Sui, J.
Affiliations
  • Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN)
  • Mind Research Network (US)
  • Brainnetome Center and National Laboratory of Pattern Recognition, Institute of Automation Chinese Academy of Sciences Beijing China
Venue
CNS Neuroscience & Therapeutics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-08-23
Volume
24
Issue
11
Pages
1037-1052
ISSN
  • 1755-5930 (ISSN-L)
  • 1755-5949
OpenAlex
W2888505821
Cited by
370
References
148
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 48 · 2024: 91 · 2023: 52 · 2022: 60 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 2
FWCI
2.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • CNS Neuroscience & Therapeutics (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (1R01MH094524, P20GM103472, R01EB005846)
  • Chinese Academy of Sciences (XDBS01000000, 61773380, 81471367)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Bipolar Disorder and Treatment
Keywords
major depressive disorder, machine learning, treatment outcome prediction, diagnostic biomarkers, bipolar disorder, mood disorders, brain imaging classification, magnetic resonance imaging, personalized treatment
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Animals, Brain, Major Depressive Disorder, Humans, Neural Pathways, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Treatment Outcome

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