Machine Learning for Genetic Prediction of Psychiatric Disorders: A Systematic Review
Affiliations
- PMID: 32591634
- DOI: 10.1038/s41380-020-0825-2
Abstract
Machine learning methods have been employed to make predictions in psychiatry from genotypes, with the potential to bring improved prediction of outcomes in psychiatric genetics; however, their current performance is unclear. We aim to systematically review machine learning methods for predicting psychiatric disorders from genetics alone and evaluate their discrimination, bias and implementation. Medline, PsycInfo, Web of Science and Scopus were searched for terms relating to genetics, psychiatric disorders and machine learning, including neural networks, random forests, support vector machines and boosting, on 10 September 2019. Following PRISMA guidelines, articles were screened for inclusion independently by two authors, extracted, and assessed for risk of bias. Overall, 63 full texts were assessed from a pool of 652 abstracts. Data were extracted for 77 models of schizophrenia, bipolar, autism or anorexia across 13 studies. Performance of machine learning methods was highly varied (0.48-0.95 AUC) and differed between schizophrenia (0.54-0.95 AUC), bipolar (0.48-0.65 AUC), autism (0.52-0.81 AUC) and anorexia (0.62-0.69 AUC). This is likely due to the high risk of bias identified in the study designs and analysis for reported results. Choices for predictor selection, hyperparameter search and validation methodology, and viewing of the test set during training were common causes of high risk of bias in analysis. Key steps in model development and validation were frequently not performed or unreported. Comparison of discrimination across studies was constrained by heterogeneity of predictors, outcome and measurement, in addition to sample overlap within and across studies. Given widespread high risk of bias and the small number of studies identified, it is important to ensure established analysis methods are adopted. We emphasise best practices in methodology and reporting for improving future studies.
Similar articles
- Predicting the risk of emergency admission with machine learning: Development and validation using linked electronic health records.PLoS Med. 2018 Nov 20;15(11):e1002695. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002695. eCollection 2018 Nov.PMID: 30458006 Free PMC article.
- Data-driven modeling and prediction of blood glucose dynamics: Machine learning applications in type 1 diabetes.Artif Intell Med. 2019 Jul;98:109-134. doi: 10.1016/j.artmed.2019.07.007. Epub 2019 Jul 26.PMID: 31383477 Review.
- A systematic review shows no performance benefit of machine learning over logistic regression for clinical prediction models.J Clin Epidemiol. 2019 Jun;110:12-22. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.02.004. Epub 2019 Feb 11.PMID: 30763612
- Machine learning algorithms for outcome prediction in (chemo)radiotherapy: An empirical comparison of classifiers.Med Phys. 2018 Jul;45(7):3449-3459. doi: 10.1002/mp.12967. Epub 2018 Jun 13.PMID: 29763967 Free PMC article.
- Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for neuropathic pain in adults.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Sep 14;9(9):CD011976. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011976.pub2.PMID: 28905362 Free PMC article. Review.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario