Machine learning approaches to distinguish bipolar disorder from borderline personality disorder: a scoping review.

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
Aroldo Dargél, Tanya Tanya, Sara Mahdiabadi, Risa Shorr, Kathleen Pajer
{"title":"Machine learning approaches to distinguish bipolar disorder from borderline personality disorder: a scoping review.","authors":"Aroldo Dargél, Tanya Tanya, Sara Mahdiabadi, Risa Shorr, Kathleen Pajer","doi":"10.1186/s12888-026-08111-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Borderline personality disorder (BPD) and bipolar disorder (BD) are debilitating psychiatric illnesses with significant rates of misdiagnosis. This scoping review explores the potential of machine learning (ML) approaches in distinguishing individuals diagnosed with BD from those with BPD, reporting the performance metrics of various predictive models.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science from inception to March 2025 for studies involving the terms \"bipolar disorder,\" \"borderline personality disorder,\" \"machine learning\", and \"artificial intelligence.\" Peer-reviewed research was included without restriction on publication date or language. Of 60 studies screened, 5 met the inclusion criteria. The review followed the PCC framework, JBI Reviewer's Manual, and PRISMA guidelines.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study identified five studies that applied predictive models to data from 591 participants to differentiate individuals with BD and BPD. Classification accuracy ranged from 61.7% to 89%. While ML models outperformed DSM-based categorical approaches overall, accuracy differed markedly by diagnosis: correctly 87.8% for BD compared with 57.7% for BPD, illustrating the persistent diagnostic challenges for BPD. Models were more accurate in distinguishing patients with both BD and BPD from those with BD alone (79.6%) than from those with BPD alone (61.7%). ML techniques based on brain imaging features achieved 80% accuracy, while mood ratings collected via smartphone enabled the differentiation of BD, BPD, and controls with 75% accuracy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Currently, few predictive models have been developed to distinguish between BD and BPD. The findings of this review suggest that ML algorithms show moderate to good performance in clinical differentiation of BD and BPD. Further research is warranted to refine and validate predictive tools that aim to improve diagnostic precision in BD and BPD clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":9029,"journal":{"name":"BMC Psychiatry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-026-08111-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Borderline personality disorder (BPD) and bipolar disorder (BD) are debilitating psychiatric illnesses with significant rates of misdiagnosis. This scoping review explores the potential of machine learning (ML) approaches in distinguishing individuals diagnosed with BD from those with BPD, reporting the performance metrics of various predictive models.

Methods: We searched Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science from inception to March 2025 for studies involving the terms "bipolar disorder," "borderline personality disorder," "machine learning", and "artificial intelligence." Peer-reviewed research was included without restriction on publication date or language. Of 60 studies screened, 5 met the inclusion criteria. The review followed the PCC framework, JBI Reviewer's Manual, and PRISMA guidelines.

Results: This study identified five studies that applied predictive models to data from 591 participants to differentiate individuals with BD and BPD. Classification accuracy ranged from 61.7% to 89%. While ML models outperformed DSM-based categorical approaches overall, accuracy differed markedly by diagnosis: correctly 87.8% for BD compared with 57.7% for BPD, illustrating the persistent diagnostic challenges for BPD. Models were more accurate in distinguishing patients with both BD and BPD from those with BD alone (79.6%) than from those with BPD alone (61.7%). ML techniques based on brain imaging features achieved 80% accuracy, while mood ratings collected via smartphone enabled the differentiation of BD, BPD, and controls with 75% accuracy.

Conclusion: Currently, few predictive models have been developed to distinguish between BD and BPD. The findings of this review suggest that ML algorithms show moderate to good performance in clinical differentiation of BD and BPD. Further research is warranted to refine and validate predictive tools that aim to improve diagnostic precision in BD and BPD clinical practice.

区分双相情感障碍和边缘型人格障碍的机器学习方法:范围回顾。
背景:边缘型人格障碍(BPD)和双相情感障碍(BD)是使人衰弱的精神疾病,误诊率很高。这篇综述探讨了机器学习(ML)方法在区分双相障碍患者和BPD患者方面的潜力,报告了各种预测模型的性能指标。方法:我们检索了Ovid MEDLINE、PubMed、Scopus和Web of Science从创立到2025年3月期间涉及“双相情感障碍”、“边缘型人格障碍”、“机器学习”和“人工智能”等术语的研究。同行评议的研究被纳入,不受出版日期和语言的限制。在筛选的60项研究中,有5项符合纳入标准。审查遵循PCC框架、JBI审稿人手册和PRISMA指南。结果:本研究确定了5项研究,对591名参与者的数据应用预测模型来区分双相障碍和BPD个体。分类准确率为61.7% ~ 89%。虽然ML模型总体上优于基于dsm的分类方法,但在诊断准确率上存在显著差异:BD的正确率为87.8%,而BPD的正确率为57.7%,这表明BPD的诊断存在持续挑战。模型在区分双相障碍和双相障碍患者和单纯性双相障碍患者(79.6%)比单纯性双相障碍患者(61.7%)更准确。基于脑成像特征的机器学习技术的准确率达到80%,而通过智能手机收集的情绪评分可以区分双相障碍、BPD和对照组,准确率为75%。结论:目前,用于区分BD和BPD的预测模型较少。本综述的研究结果表明,ML算法在BD和BPD的临床鉴别中表现出中等到良好的表现。需要进一步的研究来完善和验证旨在提高双相障碍和双相障碍临床实践诊断精度的预测工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Psychiatry
BMC Psychiatry 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
4.50%
发文量
716
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Psychiatry is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of psychiatric disorders, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书