English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies have found thalamic abnormalities in major depressive disorder (MDD). Although there are significant differences in the structure and function of the thalamus between MDD patients and healthy controls (HCs) at the group level, it is not clear whether the structural and functional features of the thalamus are suitable for use as diagnostic prediction aids at the individual level. Here, we were to test the predictive value of gray matter density (GMD), gray matter volume (GMV), amplitude of low-frequency fluctuations (ALFF), and fractional amplitude of low-frequency fluctuations (fALFF) in the thalamus using multivariate pattern analysis (MVPA).    Methods  Seventy-four MDD patients and 44 HC subjects were recruited. The Gaussian process classifier (GPC) was trained to separate MDD patients from HCs, Gaussian process regression (GPR) was trained to predict depression scores, and Multiple Kernel Learning (MKL) was applied to explore the contribution of each subregion of the thalamus.    Results  The primary findings were as follows: [1] The balanced accuracy of the GPC trained with thalamic GMD was 96.59% ( P < 0.001 ). The accuracy of the GPC trained with thalamic GMV was 93.18% ( P < 0.001 ). The correlation between Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD) score targets and predictions in the GPR trained with GMD was 0.90 ( P < 0.001, r   2    = 0.82 ), and in the GPR trained with GMV, the correlation between HAMD score targets and predictions was 0.89 ( P < 0.001, r   2    = 0.79 ). [2] The models trained with ALFF and fALFF in the thalamus failed to discriminate MDD patients from HC participants. [3] The MKL model showed that the left lateral prefrontal thalamus, the right caudal temporal thalamus, and the right sensory thalamus contribute more to the diagnostic classification.    Conclusions  The results suggested that GMD and GMV, but not functional indicators of the thalamus, have good potential for the individualized diagnosis of MDD. Furthermore, the thalamus shows the heterogeneity in the structural features of thalamic subregions for predicting MDD. To our knowledge, this is the first study to focus on the thalamus for the prediction of MDD using machine learning methods at the individual level.    Supplementary Information  The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12888-021-03414-9.

Individualized diagnosis of major depressive disorder via multivariate pattern analysis of thalamic sMRI features