ReviewBiological psychiatry global open science2026
Neuroimaging-Based Subgroups in Schizophrenia: A Critical Appraisal of Clustering Studies.
Review in Biological psychiatry global open science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Does Biological Subtyping of Brain Structure in Schizophrenia Bring Us Personalized Psychiatry?Biological psychiatry global open science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Efforts to define biologically grounded subtypes of schizophrenia have increasingly leveraged neuroimaging data and clustering algorithms. Such approaches aim to capture patient-level heterogeneity with potential clinical and mechanistic relevance. In this review, we evaluated whether subtypes derived solely from neuroimaging data can be robustly identified and meaningfully linked to clinical variation. A systematic review of peer-reviewed studies published between January 2015 and December 2024 that applied data-driven clustering algorithms to neuroimaging data was conducted to identify patient-level subtypes in individuals with schizophrenia or related spectrum disorders. We excluded transdiagnostic studies, studies focused solely on case-control classification, studies that included variables beyond neuroimaging measures (e.g., clinical or cognitive features) in the clustering input, and studies that performed feature-level clustering without assigning individual-level subtypes. Eighteen studies met inclusion criteria. These studies used structural magnetic resonance imaging features as input. Both the features and the clustering algorithms used varied widely. Across studies, 3 broad neuroanatomical patterns were identified: subtypes with widespread abnormalities, those with regionally circumscribed abnormalities, and those with largely preserved profiles. However, the specific brain regions implicated within each subtype varied considerably between studies, and no subtype profile was consistently reproduced. Few studies reported associations between subtypes and clinical features. When such associations were detected, subtypes characterized by more widespread structural abnormalities tended to show higher symptom severity. Current evidence is insufficient to determine whether macroscale neuroimaging features can define subtypes of schizophrenia that are reproducible, biologically valid, and clinically meaningful. The subtypes reported to date may instead reflect continuous variation within the disorder rather than discrete, biologically distinct entities. Advancing the field will require larger, harmonized datasets, standardized analytic pipelines, and rigorous external and longitudinal validation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.