Abstract
The top-down DSM/ICD categories of mood disorders are inaccurate, and their dogmatic nature precludes both deductive (as indisputable) and inductive (as top-down) remodeling of case definitions. In trials, psychiatric rating scale scores employed as outcome variables are invalid and rely on folk psychology-like narratives. Using machine learning techniques we developed a new precision nomothetic model of mood disorders with a recurrence of illness (ROI) index, a new endophenotype class, namely Major Dysmood Disorder (MDMD), characterized by increased ROI, a more severe phenome, and more disabilities Nonetheless, our previous studies did not compute Research and Diagnostic Algorithmic Rules (RADAR) to diagnose MDMD and score ROI, lifetime (LT), and current suicidal behaviors, as well as the phenome of mood disorders. Here we provide rules to compute bottom-up RADAR scores for MDMD, ROI, lifetime (LT) and current suicidal SI and SA, the phenome of mood disorders, and the lifetime trajectory of mood disorder patients from a family history of mood disorders and substance abuse to adverse childhood experiences, ROI, and the phenome. We also demonstrate how to plot the 12 major scores in a single RADAR graph, which displays all features in a two-dimensional plot. These graphs allow the characteristics of a patient to be displayed as an idiomatic fingerprint, allowing one to estimate the key traits and severity of the illness at a glance. Consequently, biomarker research into mood disorders should use our RADAR scores to examine pan-omics data, which should be used to enlarge our precision models and RADAR graph.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was supported by a grant of the Health Sciences Graduate Program, Health Sciences Center, State University of Londrina.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Approval for the study was obtained from the Institutional Review Board of the State University of Londrina, Brazil (protocol number: CAAE 34935814.2.0000.5231). All participants gave written informed consent prior to taking part in the study.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The dataset (PLS models) generated during and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from Prof. Dr. Michael Maes upon reasonable request and once the dataset has been fully exploited by the authors.
