4.6 Article

Support vector machine classification of major depressive disorder using diffusion-weighted neuroimaging and graph theory

期刊

FRONTIERS IN PSYCHIATRY
卷 6, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2015.00021

关键词

major depressive disorder; diffusion-weighted imaging; graph theory; support vector machine; small world network; subgenual anterior cingulate cortex

资金

  1. National Institute of Mental Health [MH59259]
  2. National Alliance for Research in Schizophrenia and Affective Disorders (NARSAD) Distinguished Investigator Award
  3. Hope for Depression Research Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recently, there has been considerable interest in understanding brain networks in major depressive disorder (MDD). Neural pathways can be tracked in the living brain using diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI); graph theory can then be used to study properties of the resulting fiber networks. To date, global abnormalities have not been reported in tractography-based graph metrics in MDD, so we used a machine learning approach based on support vector machines to differentiate depressed from healthy individuals based on multiple brain network properties. We also assessed how important specific graph metrics were for this differentiation. Finally, we conducted a local graph analysis to identify abnormal connectivity at specific nodes of the network. We were able to classify depression using whole-brain graph metrics. Small-worldness was the most useful graph metric for classification. The right pars orbitalis, right inferior parietal cortex, and left rostral anterior cingulate all showed abnormal network connectivity in MDD. This is the first use of structural global graph metrics to classify depressed individuals. These findings highlight the importance of future research to understand network properties in depression across imaging modalities, improve classification results, and relate network alterations to psychiatric symptoms, medication, and comorbidities.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据