Neuromarkers for Mental Disorders: Harnessing Population Neuroscience
Open accessAbstract
Despite abundant research into the neurobiology of mental disorders, to date neurobiological insights have had very little impact on psychiatric diagnosis or treatment. In this review, we contend that the search for neuroimaging biomarkers-neuromarkers-of mental disorders is a highly promising avenue toward improved psychiatric healthcare. However, many of the traditional tools used for psychiatric neuroimaging are inadequate for the identification of neuromarkers. Specifically, we highlight the need for larger samples and for multivariate analysis. Approaches such as machine learning are likely to be beneficial for interrogating high-dimensional neuroimaging data. We suggest that broad, population-based study designs will be important for developing neuromarkers of mental disorders, and will facilitate a move away from a phenomenological definition of mental disorder categories and toward psychiatric nosology based on biological evidence. We provide an outline of how the development of neuromarkers should occur, emphasizing the need for tests of external and construct validity, and for collaborative research efforts. Finally, we highlight some concerns regarding the development, and use of, neuromarkers in psychiatric healthcare.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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?
Biological evidence for an association between multiple relapse and further deterioration is conflicting.
“While the biological evidence for an association between multiple relapse and further deterioration is conflicting [124]”
From Prevention and early intervention in youth mental health: is it time for a multidisciplinary and trans-diagnostic model for care? (2020) · cites this paper as [124]
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 56
- Authors
- Jollans, L., & Whelan, R.
- Affiliations
- Trinity College Dublin (IE)
- Corresponding author
- Whelan, Robert
- Venue
- Frontiers in Psychiatry
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2018-06-06
- Volume
- 9
- Pages
- 242-242
- ISSN
- 1664-0640 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC5998767
- OpenAlex
- W2804880164
- Cited by
- 56
- References
- 99
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2
- FWCI
- 1.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Frontiers in Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Trinity's Access to Research Output (TARA) (Trinity College Dublin) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Irish Research Council (GOIPG/2014/418)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
- Keywords
- neuromarkers, neuroimaging biomarkers, mental illness, psychiatric classification, machine learning, multivariate analysis, generalizability, construct validity, psychiatric diagnosis, psychiatric treatment, research collaboration
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