Materials Map

Discover the materials research landscape. Find experts, partners, networks.

  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Legal Notice
  • Contact

The Materials Map is an open tool for improving networking and interdisciplinary exchange within materials research. It enables cross-database search for cooperation and network partners and discovering of the research landscape.

The dashboard provides detailed information about the selected scientist, e.g. publications. The dashboard can be filtered and shows the relationship to co-authors in different diagrams. In addition, a link is provided to find contact information.

×

Materials Map under construction

The Materials Map is still under development. In its current state, it is only based on one single data source and, thus, incomplete and contains duplicates. We are working on incorporating new open data sources like ORCID to improve the quality and the timeliness of our data. We will update Materials Map as soon as possible and kindly ask for your patience.

To Graph

1.080 Topics available

To Map

977 Locations available

693.932 PEOPLE
693.932 People People

693.932 People

Show results for 693.932 people that are selected by your search filters.

←

Page 1 of 27758

→
←

Page 1 of 0

→
PeopleLocationsStatistics
Naji, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 3
  • 2025
Motta, Antonella
  • 8
  • 52
  • 159
  • 2025
Aletan, Dirar
  • 1
  • 1
  • 0
  • 2025
Mohamed, Tarek
  • 1
  • 7
  • 2
  • 2025
Ertürk, Emre
  • 2
  • 3
  • 0
  • 2025
Taccardi, Nicola
  • 9
  • 81
  • 75
  • 2025
Kononenko, Denys
  • 1
  • 8
  • 2
  • 2025
Petrov, R. H.Madrid
  • 46
  • 125
  • 1k
  • 2025
Alshaaer, MazenBrussels
  • 17
  • 31
  • 172
  • 2025
Bih, L.
  • 15
  • 44
  • 145
  • 2025
Casati, R.
  • 31
  • 86
  • 661
  • 2025
Muller, Hermance
  • 1
  • 11
  • 0
  • 2025
Kočí, JanPrague
  • 28
  • 34
  • 209
  • 2025
Šuljagić, Marija
  • 10
  • 33
  • 43
  • 2025
Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-ArtemiBrussels
  • 14
  • 22
  • 158
  • 2025
Azam, Siraj
  • 1
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2025
Ospanova, Alyiya
  • 1
  • 6
  • 0
  • 2025
Blanpain, Bart
  • 568
  • 653
  • 13k
  • 2025
Ali, M. A.
  • 7
  • 75
  • 187
  • 2025
Popa, V.
  • 5
  • 12
  • 45
  • 2025
Rančić, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 0
  • 2025
Ollier, Nadège
  • 28
  • 75
  • 239
  • 2025
Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro
  • 4
  • 8
  • 25
  • 2025
Landes, Michael
  • 1
  • 9
  • 2
  • 2025
Rignanese, Gian-Marco
  • 15
  • 98
  • 805
  • 2025

Patel, Rashmi

  • Google
  • 3
  • 10
  • 68

in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%

Topics

Publications (3/3 displayed)

  • 2020T127. GENDER DIFFERENCES IN CLINICAL PRESENTATION AND ILLICIT SUBSTANCE USE DURING FIRST EPISODE PSYCHOSIS: AN ELECTRONIC CASE REGISTER NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING ANALYSIScitations
  • 2020T109. TRAVERSING THE TRANSDIAGNOSTIC GAP BETWEEN DEPRESSION, MANIA AND PSYCHOSIS WITH NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING1citations
  • 2019Risk Assessment Tools and Data-driven Approaches for Predicting and Preventing Suicidal Behaviour67citations

Places of action

Chart of shared publication
Leightley, Daniel
1 / 1 shared
Downs, Johnny
1 / 1 shared
Werbeloff, Nomi
1 / 1 shared
Dutta, Rina
1 / 1 shared
Gorrell, Genevieve
1 / 2 shared
Baca-Garcia, Enrique
1 / 1 shared
Hadlaczky, Gergö
1 / 1 shared
Hotopf, Matthew
1 / 1 shared
Nguyen, Dong
1 / 1 shared
Velupillai, Sumithra
1 / 2 shared
Chart of publication period
2020
2019

Co-Authors (by relevance)

  • Leightley, Daniel
  • Downs, Johnny
  • Werbeloff, Nomi
  • Dutta, Rina
  • Gorrell, Genevieve
  • Baca-Garcia, Enrique
  • Hadlaczky, Gergö
  • Hotopf, Matthew
  • Nguyen, Dong
  • Velupillai, Sumithra
OrganizationsLocationPeople

article

T109. TRAVERSING THE TRANSDIAGNOSTIC GAP BETWEEN DEPRESSION, MANIA AND PSYCHOSIS WITH NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING

  • Patel, Rashmi
Abstract

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>Background</jats:title><jats:p>The biological, clinical and social factors which underpin the aetiology of psychotic disorders are known to overlap between different ICD-10/DSM-5 diagnostic categories. A transdiagnostic approach to investigate clinical phenotype may enable a better understanding of pathophysiology at individual patient level. We applied natural language processing (NLP) tools to electronic health record (EHR) data from patients presenting with an ICD-10 diagnosis of unipolar depression to determine if symptoms at diagnosis could predict subsequent onset of a bipolar or psychotic disorder.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Methods</jats:title><jats:p>Data were obtained from 20,582 adults presenting with unipolar depression (ICD-10 F32 or F33, excluding F32.3 and F33.3) to the South London and Maudsley (SLaM) NHS Foundation Trust between April 2006 and March 2018.</jats:p><jats:p>Natural language processing (NLP) techniques were used to extract data on 21 mood and affective symptoms from free text clinical assessments documented in the period -3/+3 months from the date of the diagnosis of unipolar depression. We obtained descriptive analyses of demographics and symptom prevalence.</jats:p><jats:p>Symptoms were categorised into four groups: 1. Depressive (low mood, anhedonia, feelings of guilt, hopelessness, helplessness, psychomotor retardation, worthlessness, tearfulness, low energy), 2. Manic (elation, grandiosity, pressured speech, flight of ideas), 3. Biological symptoms (insomnia, disturbed sleep, low appetite, weight loss, poor concentration) and 4. Emotional/behavioural symptoms (mood instability, agitation, irritability). The symptom network structure was estimated using the Enhanced Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operation procedure. We assessed network stability via a case-dropping bootstrapping procedure.</jats:p><jats:p>We investigated associations between each of the four symptom groups and clinical outcomes using multivariable Cox regression to predict five-year risk of bipolar disorder (ICD-10 F30/F31) or a psychotic disorder (ICD-10 F2*).</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results</jats:title><jats:p>Of all patients presenting with unipolar depression, 19,569 (95.1%) had at least one documented depressive symptom, 16,199 (78.7%) had at least one biological symptom, 10,006 (48.6%) had at least one emotional/behavioural symptom, and 1,372 (6.67%) had at least one manic symptom. Patients with at least one manic symptom were significantly more likely to be male (OR: 1.25 (95% CI 1.12 - 1.40), p &amp;lt; 0.001) and less likely to be of Black (OR: 0.80 (0.68 - 0.93), p = 0.004) or Other ethnicity (OR: 0.78 (0.66 - 0.91), p = 0.003). Elation was the most commonly reported manic symptom (3.17%). Network analysis revealed that the presence of manic symptoms was associated with co-occurrence of agitation, irritability and mood instability. Agitation was the most central symptom in terms of strength, betweenness and expected influence. The resulting network remained stable after dropping up to 33% of cases from the sample.</jats:p><jats:p>1,861 (9.04%) patients who initially presented with unipolar depression subsequently developed a mania/bipolar disorder or psychotic disorder within 5 years. The presence of at least one manic (HR: 1.71, 1.50 – 1.97), biological (HR: 1.33, 1.16 – 1.53) or emotional (HR: 1.91, 1.73 – 2.13) symptom was associated with significantly increased risk of onset of a bipolar or psychotic disorder.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Discussion</jats:title><jats:p>We found that patients with unipolar depression have a heterogenous clinical phenotype with a significant proportion going on to develop a bipolar or psychotic disorder within 5 years. Symptoms extracted from the EHR using NLP were predictive of subsequent onset of a bipolar or psychotic disorder. A transdiagnostic approach to defining clinical phenotype may help to better predict subsequent clinical outcomes.</jats:p></jats:sec>

Topics
  • laser emission spectroscopy
  • strength
  • size-exclusion chromatography
  • chemical ionisation