To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Against the background of missing culturally sensitive mental health care services for refugees, we developed a group intervention (Empowerment) for refugees at level 3 within the stratified Stepped and Collaborative Care Model of the project Mental Health in Refugees and Asylum Seekers (MEHIRA). We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of the Empowerment group intervention with its focus on psychoeducation, stress management, and emotion regulation strategies in a culturally sensitive context for refugees with affective disorders compared to treatment-as-usual (TAU).
At level 3 of the MEHIRA project, 149 refugees and asylum seekers with clinically relevant depressive symptoms were randomized to the Empowerment group intervention or TAU. Treatment comprised 16 therapy sessions conducted over 12 weeks. Effects were measured with the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and the Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MÅDRS). Further scales included assessed emotional distress, self-efficacy, resilience, and quality of life.
Intention-to-treat analyses show significant cross-level interactions on both self-rated depressive symptoms (PHQ-9; F(1,147) = 13.32, p < 0.001) and clinician-rated depressive symptoms (MÅDRS; F(1,147) = 6.91, p = 0.01), indicating an improvement in depressive symptoms from baseline to post-intervention in the treatment group compared to the control group. The effect sizes for both scales were moderate (d = 0.68, 95% CI 0.21–1.15 for PHQ-9 and d = 0.51, 95% CI 0.04–0.99 for MÅDRS).
In the MEHIRA project comparing an SCCM approach versus TAU, the Empowerment group intervention at level 3 showed effectiveness for refugees with moderately severe depressive symptoms.
Individuals with bipolar disorder are commonly correctly diagnosed a decade after symptom onset. Machine learning techniques may aid in early recognition and reduce the disease burden. As both individuals at risk and those with a manifest disease display structural brain markers, structural magnetic resonance imaging may provide relevant classification features.
Following a pre-registered protocol, we trained linear support vector machine (SVM) to classify individuals according to their estimated risk for bipolar disorder using regional cortical thickness of help-seeking individuals from seven study sites (N = 276). We estimated the risk using three state-of-the-art assessment instruments (BPSS-P, BARS, EPIbipolar).
For BPSS-P, SVM achieved a fair performance of Cohen's κ of 0.235 (95% CI 0.11–0.361) and a balanced accuracy of 63.1% (95% CI 55.9–70.3) in the 10-fold cross-validation. In the leave-one-site-out cross-validation, the model performed with a Cohen's κ of 0.128 (95% CI −0.069 to 0.325) and a balanced accuracy of 56.2% (95% CI 44.6–67.8). BARS and EPIbipolar could not be predicted. In post hoc analyses, regional surface area, subcortical volumes as well as hyperparameter optimization did not improve the performance.
Individuals at risk for bipolar disorder, as assessed by BPSS-P, display brain structural alterations that can be detected using machine learning. The achieved performance is comparable to previous studies which attempted to classify patients with manifest disease and healthy controls. Unlike previous studies of bipolar risk, our multicenter design permitted a leave-one-site-out cross-validation. Whole-brain cortical thickness seems to be superior to other structural brain features.
Response to lithium in patients with bipolar disorder is associated with clinical and transdiagnostic genetic factors. The predictive combination of these variables might help clinicians better predict which patients will respond to lithium treatment.
To use a combination of transdiagnostic genetic and clinical factors to predict lithium response in patients with bipolar disorder.
This study utilised genetic and clinical data (n = 1034) collected as part of the International Consortium on Lithium Genetics (ConLi+Gen) project. Polygenic risk scores (PRS) were computed for schizophrenia and major depressive disorder, and then combined with clinical variables using a cross-validated machine-learning regression approach. Unimodal, multimodal and genetically stratified models were trained and validated using ridge, elastic net and random forest regression on 692 patients with bipolar disorder from ten study sites using leave-site-out cross-validation. All models were then tested on an independent test set of 342 patients. The best performing models were then tested in a classification framework.
The best performing linear model explained 5.1% (P = 0.0001) of variance in lithium response and was composed of clinical variables, PRS variables and interaction terms between them. The best performing non-linear model used only clinical variables and explained 8.1% (P = 0.0001) of variance in lithium response. A priori genomic stratification improved non-linear model performance to 13.7% (P = 0.0001) and improved the binary classification of lithium response. This model stratified patients based on their meta-polygenic loadings for major depressive disorder and schizophrenia and was then trained using clinical data.
Using PRS to first stratify patients genetically and then train machine-learning models with clinical predictors led to large improvements in lithium response prediction. When used with other PRS and biological markers in the future this approach may help inform which patients are most likely to respond to lithium treatment.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.