A primer on the use of machine learning to distil knowledge from data in biological psychiatry.

Applications of machine learning in the biomedical sciences are growing rapidly. This growth has been spurred by diverse cross-institutional and interdisciplinary collaborations, public availability of large datasets, an increase in the accessibility of analytic routines, and the availability of powerful computing resources. With this increased access and exposure to machine learning comes a responsibility for education and a deeper understanding of its bases and bounds, borne equally by data scientists seeking to ply their analytic wares in medical research and by biomedical scientists seeking to harness such methods to glean knowledge from data. This article provides an accessible and critical review of machine learning for a biomedically informed audience, as well as its applications in psychiatry. The review covers definitions and expositions of commonly used machine learning methods, and historical trends of their use in psychiatry. We also provide a set of standards, namely Guidelines for REporting Machine Learning Investigations in Neuropsychiatry (GREMLIN), for designing and reporting studies that use machine learning as a primary data-analysis approach. Lastly, we propose the establishment of the Machine Learning in Psychiatry (MLPsych) Consortium, enumerate its objectives, and identify areas of opportunity for future applications of machine learning in biological psychiatry. This review serves as a cautiously optimistic primer on machine learning for those on the precipice as they prepare to dive into the field, either as methodological practitioners or well-informed consumers.

45 years German Society of Biological Psychiatry (DGBP).

The foundation of a German Society of Biological Psychiatry (DGBP) was initiated at the Second World Congress of Biological Psychiatry of the WFSBP in Barcelona in 1978. Its mission was and is to promote interdisciplinary research on the biology of mental disorders and to translate results of biological research into clinical practice. During the presidency of Peter Falkai, its tasks were defined to improve the quality and support of biologically oriented research in Germany by the DFG (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft; German Research Foundation), BMBF (Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung) and EU (European Union), to promote young researchers doing biologically oriented research, to improve on the diagnosis and therapy of mental disorders and to advise policy makers by taking part in legal processes. The DGBP has been a corporate member of the WFSBP from its beginning, became a cooperative member of the DGPPN (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Psychosomatik und Nervenheilkunde), later of the German Brain Council, and fostered relationships with other scientific societies. Over the past 45 years, more than twenty congresses were held in Germany and neighboring countries. Emerging from the pandemic, the DGBP is ready to continue its mission to promote interdisciplinary research on the biology of mental disorders with a focus on the development of young scientists and to translate results of biological research into clinical practice, with regard to pharmacotherapy in close cooperation with the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Neuropsychopharmakologie und Pharmakopsychiatrie (AGNP). In this sense, this article also aims to stimulate the cooperation of the society with other national and international partners and to foster new relationships with young scientists and professionals interested in the aims and goals of the DGBP.

[Towards a pragmatic cohabitation of theoretical and clinical models: The example of "Good Psychiatric Management" in the treatment of borderline personality disorder]. / Pour une cohabitation pragmatique des modèles théoriques et cliniques : l'exemple du « Good Psychiatric Management ¼ dans le traitement du trouble de personnalité borderline.

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a common disorder in general and clinical populations and is related to potentially severe medical and socio-professional consequences. Treatment of BPD is based on evidence-based psychotherapies (such as Dialectical Behavioral Therapy, Mentalization-Based Therapy, Schema-Focused Therapy or Transference Focused Psychotherapy), which have been shown effective but are poorly available in France. Pharmacological treatments, which are more easily available, are not effective in treating symptoms of the disorder but can be useful in management of comorbidities. In this context, recently called "generalist" models have been developed, which every well-trained psychiatrist can implement in their daily practice, combining practical elements from evidence-based psychotherapies and elements of pharmacological management of symptoms and comorbidities. The purpose of this article is to present one of these models, the Good Psychiatric Management (GPM) and its basic principles and its applications, and to provide one of the first French-speaking resources about this model. In addition, beyond the practical elements proposed by the GPM, we discuss the deeper question that it raises, namely the question of a pragmatic integration of different theoretical and clinical models. Indeed, the treatment of BPD patients is at the junction of different conceptualizations of mental pathology (psychopathological, neurobiological) and different modalities of practice (psychotherapy, biological psychiatry). In a French context, that sometimes separates these two models, and in our opinion GPM constitutes an example of clinical collaboration which shows the interest of the combined role of psychiatrist-psychotherapist.

World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) guidelines for treatment of anxiety, obsessive-compulsive and posttraumatic stress disorders - Version 3. Part I: Anxiety disorders.

AIM: This is the third version of the guideline of the World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) Task Force for the Pharmacological Treatment of Anxiety, Obsessive-Compulsive and Posttraumatic Stress Disorders (published in 2002, revised in 2008). METHOD: A consensus panel of 33 international experts representing 22 countries developed recommendations based on efficacy and acceptability of available treatments. In total, 1007 RCTs for the treatment of these disorders in adults, adolescents, and children with medications, psychotherapy and other non-pharmacological interventions were evaluated, applying the same rigorous methods that are standard for the assessment of medications. RESULT: This paper, Part I, contains recommendations for the treatment of panic disorder/agoraphobia (PDA), generalised anxiety disorder (GAD), social anxiety disorder (SAD), specific phobias, mixed anxiety disorders in children and adolescents, separation anxiety and selective mutism. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) are first-line medications. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is the first-line psychotherapy for anxiety disorders. The expert panel also made recommendations for patients not responding to standard treatments and recommendations against interventions with insufficient evidence. CONCLUSION: It is the goal of this initiative to provide treatment guidance for these disorders that has validity throughout the world.

World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) guidelines for treatment of anxiety, obsessive-compulsive and posttraumatic stress disorders - Version 3. Part II: OCD and PTSD.

AIM: This is the third version of the guideline of the World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) Task Force for the Pharmacological Treatment of Anxiety, Obsessive-Compulsive and Posttraumatic Stress Disorders which was published in 2002 and revised in 2008. METHOD: A consensus panel of 34 international experts representing 22 countries developed recommendations based on efficacy and acceptability of the treatments. In this version, not only medications but also psychotherapies and other non-pharmacological interventions were evaluated, applying the same rigorous methods that are standard for the assessment of medication treatments. RESULT: The present paper (Part II) contains recommendations based on published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for the treatment of OCD (n = 291) and PTSD (n = 234) in children, adolescents, and adults. The accompanying paper (Part I) contains the recommendations for the treatment of anxiety disorders.For OCD, first-line treatments are selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT). Internet-CBT was also superior to active controls. Several second-line medications are available, including clomipramine. For treatment-resistant cases, several options are available, including augmentation of SSRI treatment with antipsychotics and other drugs.Other non-pharmacological treatments, including repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), deep brain stimulation (DBS) and others were also evaluated.For PTSD, SSRIs and the SNRI venlafaxine are first-line treatments. CBT is the psychotherapy modality with the best body of evidence. For treatment-unresponsive patients, augmentation of SSRI treatment with antipsychotics may be an option. CONCLUSION: OCD and PTSD can be effectively treated with CBT and medications.

Clinical guidelines for the use of lifestyle-based mental health care in major depressive disorder: World Federation of Societies for Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) and Australasian Society of Lifestyle Medicine (ASLM) taskforce.

OBJECTIVES: The primary objectives of these international guidelines were to provide a global audience of clinicians with (a) a series of evidence-based recommendations for the provision of lifestyle-based mental health care in clinical practice for adults with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) and (b) a series of implementation considerations that may be applicable across a range of settings. METHODS: Recommendations and associated evidence-based gradings were based on a series of systematic literature searches of published research as well as the clinical expertise of taskforce members. The focus of the guidelines was eight lifestyle domains: physical activity and exercise, smoking cessation, work-directed interventions, mindfulness-based and stress management therapies, diet, sleep, loneliness and social support, and green space interaction. The following electronic bibliographic databases were searched for articles published prior to June 2020: PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Cochrane Methodology Register), CINAHL, PsycINFO. Evidence grading was based on the level of evidence specific to MDD and risk of bias, in accordance with the World Federation of Societies for Biological Psychiatry criteria. RESULTS: Nine recommendations were formed. The recommendations with the highest ratings to improve MDD were the use of physical activity and exercise, relaxation techniques, work-directed interventions, sleep, and mindfulness-based therapies (Grade 2). Interventions related to diet and green space were recommended, but with a lower strength of evidence (Grade 3). Recommendations regarding smoking cessation and loneliness and social support were based on expert opinion. Key implementation considerations included the need for input from allied health professionals and support networks to implement this type of approach, the importance of partnering such recommendations with behaviour change support, and the need to deliver interventions using a biopsychosocial-cultural framework. CONCLUSIONS: Lifestyle-based interventions are recommended as a foundational component of mental health care in clinical practice for adults with Major Depressive Disorder, where other evidence-based therapies can be added or used in combination. The findings and recommendations of these guidelines support the need for further research to address existing gaps in efficacy and implementation research, especially for emerging lifestyle-based approaches (e.g. green space, loneliness and social support interventions) where data are limited. Further work is also needed to develop innovative approaches for delivery and models of care, and to support the training of health professionals regarding lifestyle-based mental health care.

Expanding Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion to Disability: Opportunities for Biological Psychiatry.

Given its subject matter, biological psychiatry is uniquely poised to lead STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) initiatives related to disability. Drawing on literatures in science, philosophy, psychiatry, and disability studies, we outline how that leadership might be undertaken. We first review existing opportunities for the advancement of DEI in biological psychiatry around axes of gender and race. We then explore the expansion of biological psychiatry's DEI efforts to disability, especially along the lines of representation and access, community accountability, first-person testimony, and revised theoretical frameworks for pathology. We close with concrete recommendations for scholarship and practice going forward. By tackling head-on the challenge of disability inclusion, biological psychiatry has the opportunity to be a force of transformation in the biological sciences and beyond.

Conceptualizing the Influence of Social and Structural Determinants of Neurobiology and Mental Health: Why and How Biological Psychiatry Can Do Better at Addressing the Consequences of Inequity.

Psychiatry and allied disciplines have recognized the potency of structural and social determinants of mental health, yet there has been scant attention given to the roles of neurobiology in the links between structural and social determinants and mental health. In this article, we make the case for why greater attention must be given to structural and social determinants of biological psychiatry by researchers, practitioners, and policy-makers. After defining these terms and theoretical frameworks for considering their relevance in biological psychiatry, we review empirical research with marginalized and minoritized racial, ethnic, gender, sexual, and economic communities that reveals the ways in which structural and social determinants affect neurobiological functioning with implications for mental health. We give particular emphasis to developmental science and developmentally informed research, because structural and social determinants influence neurobiological adaptation and maturation across the lifespan. We conclude with recommendations for advancing research, practice, and policy that connect biological psychiatry with structural and social determinants of health. Foremost among these is diversifying the ranks of biological psychiatry, from classrooms through laboratories, hospitals, and community health centers. Transforming and advancing the understanding of the structural and social determinants of neurobiology and mental health is most likely to come through transforming the discipline itself.

Biological Psychiatry in Displaced Populations: What We Know, and What We Need to Begin to Learn.

Conflict and climate change continue to displace millions of people, who experience unique trauma and stressors as they resettle in host countries. Both children and adults who are forcibly displaced, or choose to migrate, experience posttraumatic stress disorder, anxiety, depression, and other mental health conditions at higher rates than the general population. This may be attributed to severe, cumulative stress and trauma (largely interpersonal traumas); discrimination and harassment in host countries; and structural barriers to accessing and addressing mental health concerns, including clinician availability, language barriers, cultural differences, geographic accessibility, health care access, and stigma. Despite high exposure to and clinical impact of such experiences, and despite representing 1% of the world population, forcibly displaced people are underrepresented in neuroscientific research. The availability of such literature and research findings is significant in understanding the unique genetic and cultural aspects of trauma- and stress-related mental health, advocacy, reducing stigma, informing prevention, and treatment. The present work aimed to explore how the field of neuroscience can address mental health equity for individuals who have been uprooted in relation to land, with a focus on refugee populations. We offer practical suggestions on how to improve research in this area and narrow the gap in knowledge.

Clinician guidelines for the treatment of psychiatric disorders with nutraceuticals and phytoceuticals: The World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) and Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) Taskforce.

OBJECTIVES: The therapeutic use of nutrient-based 'nutraceuticals' and plant-based 'phytoceuticals' for the treatment of mental disorders is common; however, despite recent research progress, there have not been any updated global clinical guidelines since 2015. To address this, the World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) and the Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Disorders (CANMAT) convened an international taskforce involving 31 leading academics and clinicians from 15 countries, between 2019 and 2021. These guidelines are aimed at providing a definitive evidence-informed approach to assist clinicians in making decisions around the use of such agents for major psychiatric disorders. We also provide detail on safety and tolerability, and clinical advice regarding prescription (e.g. indications, dosage), in addition to consideration for use in specialised populations. METHODS: The methodology was based on the WFSBP guidelines development process. Evidence was assessed based on the WFSBP grading of evidence (and was modified to focus on Grade A level evidence - meta-analysis or two or more RCTs - due to the breadth of data available across all nutraceuticals and phytoceuticals across major psychiatric disorders). The taskforce assessed both the 'level of evidence' (LoE) (i.e. meta-analyses or RCTs) and the assessment of the direction of the evidence, to determine whether the intervention was 'Recommended' (+++), 'Provisionally Recommended' (++), 'Weakly Recommended' (+), 'Not Currently Recommended' (+/-), or 'Not Recommended' (-) for a particular condition. Due to the number of clinical trials now available in the field, we firstly examined the data from our two meta-reviews of meta-analyses (nutraceuticals conducted in 2019, and phytoceuticals in 2020). We then performed a search of additional relevant RCTs and reported on both these data as the primary drivers supporting our clinical recommendations. Lower levels of evidence, including isolated RCTs, open label studies, case studies, preclinical research, and interventions with only traditional or anecdotal use, were not assessed. RESULTS: Amongst nutraceuticals with Grade A evidence, positive directionality and varying levels of support (recommended, provisionally recommended, or weakly recommended) was found for adjunctive omega-3 fatty acids (+++), vitamin D (+), adjunctive probiotics (++), adjunctive zinc (++), methylfolate (+), and adjunctive s-adenosyl methionine (SAMe) (+) in the treatment of unipolar depression. Monotherapy omega-3 (+/-), folic acid (-), vitamin C (-), tryptophan (+/-), creatine (+/-), inositol (-), magnesium (-), and n-acetyl cysteine (NAC) (+/-) and SAMe (+/-) were not supported for this use. In bipolar disorder, omega-3 had weak support for bipolar depression (+), while NAC was not currently recommended (+/-). NAC was weakly recommended (+) in the treatment of OCD-related disorders; however, no other nutraceutical had sufficient evidence in any anxiety-related disorder. Vitamin D (+), NAC (++), methylfolate (++) were recommended to varying degrees in the treatment of the negative symptoms in schizophrenia, while omega-3 fatty acids were not, although evidence suggests a role for prevention of transition to psychosis in high-risk youth, with potential pre-existing fatty acid deficiency. Micronutrients (+) and vitamin D (+) were weakly supported in the treatment of ADHD, while omega-3 (+/-) and omega-9 fatty acids (-), acetyl L carnitine (-), and zinc (+/-) were not supported. Phytoceuticals with supporting Grade A evidence and positive directionality included St John's wort (+++), saffron (++), curcumin (++), and lavender (+) in the treatment of unipolar depression, while rhodiola use was not supported for use in mood disorders. Ashwagandha (++), galphimia (+), and lavender (++) were modestly supported in the treatment of anxiety disorders, while kava (-) and chamomile (+/-) were not recommended for generalised anxiety disorder. Ginkgo was weakly supported in the adjunctive treatment of negative symptoms of schizophrenia (+), but not supported in the treatment of ADHD (+/-). With respect to safety and tolerability, all interventions were deemed to have varying acceptable levels of safety and tolerability for low-risk over-the-counter use in most circumstances. Quality and standardisation of phytoceuticals was also raised by the taskforce as a key limiting issue for firmer confidence in these agents. Finally, the taskforce noted that such use of nutraceuticals or phytoceuticals be primarily recommended (where supportive evidence exists) adjunctively within a standard medical/health professional care model, especially in cases of more severe mental illness. Some meta-analyses reviewed contained data from heterogenous studies involving poor methodology. Isolated RCTs and other data such as open label or case series were not included, and it is recognised that an absence of data does not imply lack of efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the current data and clinician input, a range of nutraceuticals and phytoceuticals were given either a supportive recommendation or a provisional recommendation across a range of various psychiatric disorders. However several had only a weak endorsement for potential use; for a few it was not possible to reach a clear recommendation direction, largely due to mixed study findings; while some other agents showed no obvious therapeutic benefit and were clearly not recommended for use. It is the intention of these guidelines to inform psychiatric/medical, and health professional practice globally.

Unconsidered issues of measurement noninvariance in biological psychiatry: A focus on biological phenotypes of psychopathology.

There is increasing appreciation that certain biological processes may not be equally related to all psychiatric symptoms in a given diagnostic category. Research on the biological phenotyping of psychopathology has begun examining the etiological and treatment implications of identified biotypes; however, little attention has been paid to a critical methodological implication of these results: measurement noninvariance. Measurement invariance is the ability of an instrument to measure the same construct, the same way, across different people, or across different time points for the same individual. If what a measure quantifies differs across different people (e.g., those with or without a particular biotype) or time points, then it is invalid to directly compare means on that measure. Using a running example of inflammatory phenotypes of depression, we first describe the biological phenotyping of psychopathology. Second, we discuss three types of measurement invariance. Third, we demonstrate how differential biology-symptom associations invariably creates measurement noninvariance using a theoretical example and simulated data (for which code is provided). We also show how this issue can lead to false conclusions about the broader diagnostic construct. Finally, we provide several suggestions for addressing these important issues to help advance the field of biological psychiatry.

Principles of patients selection and safety of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation - position statement of the Section of Biological Psychiatry of the Polish Psychiatric Association. / Zasady kwalifikacji pacjentów i zasady bezpieczenstwa stosowania terapii przezczaszkowa stymulacja magnetyczna seria bodzców ­ stanowisko Sekcji Biologicznej Polskiego Towarzystwa Psychiatrycznego.

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a method of noninvasive brain stimulation developed since the 1980s. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is one of the methods of noninvasive brain stimulation, which is increasingly used to treat psychiatric disorders. Recent years witnessed a dynamic growth in the number of sites offering therapy with rTMS and of the interest of patients in this method in Poland. This article presents the position statement of the working group of the Section of Biological Psychiatry of the Polish Psychiatric Association concerning the proper patients selection and safety of use of rTMS in the therapy of psychiatric conditions. Before starting to use rTMS, the involved personnel should undergo a period of training in one of the centers with relevant experience. Equipment dedicated to perform rTMS should be appropriately certified. The main therapeutic indication is depression, including drug-resistant patients. rTMS may also be used in obsessive-compulsive disorder, negative symptoms and auditory hallucinations in schizophrenia, nicotine addiction, cognitive and behavioral disturbances in Alzheimer's disease, and post-traumatic stress disorder. The strength of magnetic stimuli and the overall dosing of stimulation must be based on the recommendations of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. The main contraindications are the metal elements in the body, especially medical electronic devices near the stimulating coil, epilepsy, hearing loss, structural changes in the brain, which may be associated with epileptogenic foci, pharmacotherapy, which lowers the seizure threshold, and pregnancy. The main side effects are induction of epileptic seizure, syncope, pain and discomfort during stimulation, as well as induction of manic or hypomanic episodes. The respective management is described in the article.

The World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry guidelines on the assessment and pharmacological treatment of compulsive sexual behaviour disorder.

OBJECTIVES: The current guidelines aim to evaluate the role of pharmacological agents in the treatment of patients with compulsive sexual behaviour disorder (CSBD). They are intended for use in clinical practice by clinicians who treat patients with CSBD. METHODS: An extensive literature search was conducted using the English-language-literature indexed on PubMed and Google Scholar without time limit, supplemented by other sources, including published reviews. RESULTS: Each treatment recommendation was evaluated with respect to the strength of evidence for its efficacy, safety, tolerability, and feasibility. Psychoeducation and psychotherapy are first-choice treatments and should always be conducted. The type of medication recommended depended mainly on the intensity of CSBD and comorbid sexual and psychiatric disorders. There are few randomised controlled trials. Although no medications carry formal indications for CSBD, selective-serotonin-reuptake-inhibitors and naltrexone currently constitute the most relevant pharmacological treatments for the treatment of CSBD. In cases of CSBD with comorbid paraphilic disorders, hormonal agents may be indicated, and one should refer to previously published guidelines on the treatment of adults with paraphilic disorders. Specific recommendations are also proposed in case of chemsex behaviour associated with CSBD. CONCLUSIONS: An algorithm is proposed with different levels of treatment for different categories of patients with CSBD.