| 1. |
- Carvalho, Andre F., et al.
(author)
-
Evidence-based umbrella review of 162 peripheral biomarkers for major mental disorders
- 2020
-
In: Translational Psychiatry. - : NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP. - 2158-3188. ; 10:1
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The literature on non-genetic peripheral biomarkers for major mental disorders is broad, with conflicting results. An umbrella review of meta-analyses of non-genetic peripheral biomarkers for Alzheimers disease, autism spectrum disorder, bipolar disorder (BD), major depressive disorder, and schizophrenia, including first-episode psychosis. We included meta-analyses that compared alterations in peripheral biomarkers between participants with mental disorders to controls (i.e., between-group meta-analyses) and that assessed biomarkers after treatment (i.e., within-group meta-analyses). Evidence for association was hierarchically graded using a priori defined criteria against several biases. The Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) instrument was used to investigate study quality. 1161 references were screened. 110 met inclusion criteria, relating to 359 meta-analytic estimates and 733,316 measurements, on 162 different biomarkers. Only two estimates met a priori defined criteria for convincing evidence (elevated awakening cortisol levels in euthymic BD participants relative to controls and decreased pyridoxal levels in participants with schizophrenia relative to controls). Of 42 estimates which met criteria for highly suggestive evidence only five biomarker aberrations occurred in more than one disorder. Only 15 meta-analyses had a power >0.8 to detect a small effect size, and most (81.9%) meta-analyses had high heterogeneity. Although some associations met criteria for either convincing or highly suggestive evidence, overall the vast literature of peripheral biomarkers for major mental disorders is affected by bias and is underpowered. No convincing evidence supported the existence of a trans-diagnostic biomarker. Adequately powered and methodologically sound future large collaborative studies are warranted.
|
|
| 2. |
- Halabi, Ramzi, et al.
(author)
-
Not missing at random : Missing data are associated with clinical status and trajectories in an electronic monitoring longitudinal study of bipolar disorder
- 2024
-
In: Journal of Psychiatric Research. - 0022-3956 .- 1879-1379. ; 174, s. 326-331
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- There is limited information on the association between participants' clinical status or trajectories and missing data in electronic monitoring studies of bipolar disorder (BD). We collected self-ratings scales and sensor data in 145 adults with BD. Using a new metric, Missing Data Ratio (MDR), we assessed missing self-rating data and sensor data monitoring activity and sleep. Missing data were lowest for participants in the midst of a depressive episode, intermediate for participants with subsyndromal symptoms, and highest for participants who were euthymic. Over a mean ± SD follow-up of 246 ± 181 days, missing data remained unchanged for participants whose clinical status did not change throughout the study (i.e., those who entered the study in a depressive episode and did not improve, or those who entered the study euthymic and remained euthymic). Conversely, when participants' clinical status changed during the study (e.g., those who entered the study euthymic and experienced the occurrence of a depressive episode), missing data for self-rating scales increased, but not for sensor data. Overall missing data were associated with participants' clinical status and its changes, suggesting that these are not missing at random.
|
|
