CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2026
Eye-Tracking Phenotypes Across the Depressive Spectrum: Joint Modeling of Diagnostic Group and Symptom Severity.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Chen Xiangting, Huang Min
Аннотация
AIMS: To characterize eye-tracking alterations across the depressive spectrum and evaluate their value for diagnostic stratification and symptom severity estimation.
METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 183 participants completed a multi-paradigm eye-tracking battery. Group differences and associations with 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17) scores were examined with multiple-comparison correction and covariate adjustment. Classification, regression, and multi-task models used repeated nested resampling with fold-specific preprocessing.
RESULTS: False discovery rate (FDR)-significant between-group differences were observed for two first-fixation latency measures from lateral-gaze orienting and for antisaccade accuracy. Among 35 candidate features, 33 had covariate-adjusted group associations at p < 0.05. Across 539 retained features, covariate-adjusted generalized additive models identified eight FDR-significant associations with HAMD-17. In multi-task analysis, Route B had numerically higher mean internal performance than Route A, although paired between-route differences were imprecisely estimated (accuracy, 0.929 vs. 0.864; macro F1, 0.928 vs. 0.859; R2, 0.834 vs. 0.596). Regression-only performance was similar to Route B (R2, 0.847).
CONCLUSION: Eye-tracking alterations spanned the depressive spectrum and were associated with symptom severity after covariate adjustment. Between-route differences were imprecisely estimated, and joint-task training showed no clear improvement in severity estimation. External and temporal validation are required before clinical use.
METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 183 participants completed a multi-paradigm eye-tracking battery. Group differences and associations with 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17) scores were examined with multiple-comparison correction and covariate adjustment. Classification, regression, and multi-task models used repeated nested resampling with fold-specific preprocessing.
RESULTS: False discovery rate (FDR)-significant between-group differences were observed for two first-fixation latency measures from lateral-gaze orienting and for antisaccade accuracy. Among 35 candidate features, 33 had covariate-adjusted group associations at p < 0.05. Across 539 retained features, covariate-adjusted generalized additive models identified eight FDR-significant associations with HAMD-17. In multi-task analysis, Route B had numerically higher mean internal performance than Route A, although paired between-route differences were imprecisely estimated (accuracy, 0.929 vs. 0.864; macro F1, 0.928 vs. 0.859; R2, 0.834 vs. 0.596). Regression-only performance was similar to Route B (R2, 0.847).
CONCLUSION: Eye-tracking alterations spanned the depressive spectrum and were associated with symptom severity after covariate adjustment. Between-route differences were imprecisely estimated, and joint-task training showed no clear improvement in severity estimation. External and temporal validation are required before clinical use.