Evidence Hub

Detecting Neuroimaging Biomarkers for Depression: A Meta-analysis of Multivariate Pattern Recognition Studies

Kambeitz J, Cabral C, Sacchet MD, Gotlib IH, Zahn R, Serpa MH, Walter M, Falkai P et al.

Biological psychiatry, 2017

912 participants · 148 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Multiple studies have examined functional and structural brain alteration in patients diagnosed with major depressive disorder (MDD). The introduction of multivariate statistical methods allows investigators to utilize data concerning these brain alterations to generate diagnostic models that accurately differentiate patients with MDD from healthy control subjects (HCs). However, there is substantial heterogeneity in the reported results, the methodological approaches, and the clinical characteristics of participants in these studies.

METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis of all studies using neuroimaging (volumetric measures derived from T1-weighted images, task-based functional magnetic resonance imaging [MRI], resting-state MRI, or diffusion tensor imaging) in combination with multivariate statistical methods to differentiate patients diagnosed with MDD from HCs.

RESULTS: Thirty-three (k = 33) samples including 912 patients with MDD and 894 HCs were included in the meta-analysis. Across all studies, patients with MDD were separated from HCs with 77% sensitivity and 78% specificity. Classification based on resting-state MRI (85% sensitivity, 83% specificity) and on diffusion tensor imaging data (88% sensitivity, 92% specificity) outperformed classifications based on structural MRI (70% sensitivity, 71% specificity) and task-based functional MRI (74% sensitivity, 77% specificity).

CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate the high representational capacity of…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 912 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free