Key result
Personalized HRV scaling improves stress classification accuracy to 94% in major depressive disorder.
Why the study?
Stress detection via heart rate variability using machine learning is established in healthy individuals, but its application in psychiatric patients remains underexplored.
Does machine learning based on HRV features accurately classify stress and relaxation responses in patients with MDD, PD, and healthy controls?
Observational (n=147)
No
Does machine learning based on HRV features accurately classify stress and relaxation responses in patients with MDD, PD, and healthy controls?
Absolute Event Rate: 0.94% vs 0.67%
Machine learning algorithms can classify stress and relaxation states using HRV features, with personalized longitudinal scaling significantly improving accuracy, though classification is more challenging in psychiatric patients than healthy controls.
May aid stress detection in MDD; leaves open clinical utility pending prospective trials.
Background: Stress is a significant risk factor for psychiatric disorders such as major depressive disorder (MDD) and panic disorder (PD). This highlights the need for advanced stress-monitoring technologies to improve treatment. Stress affects the autonomic nervous system, which can be evaluated via heart rate variability (HRV). While machine learning has enabled automated stress detection via HRV in healthy individuals, its application in psychiatric patients remains underexplored. This study evaluated the feasibility of using machine-learning algorithms to detect stress automatically in MDD and PD patients, as well as healthy controls (HCs), based on HRV features. Methods: The study included 147 participants (MDD: 41, PD: 47, HC: 59) who visited the laboratory up to five times over 12 weeks. HRV data were collected during stress and relaxation tasks, with 20 HRV features extracted. Random forest and multilayer perceptron classifiers were applied to distinguish between the stress and relaxation tasks. Feature importance was analyzed using SHapley Additive exPlanations, and differences in HRV between the tasks (ΔHRV) were compared across groups. The impact of personalized longitudinal scaling on classification accuracy was also assessed. Results: Random forest classification accuracies were 0.67 for MDD, 0.69 for PD, and 0.73 for HCs, indicating higher accuracy in the HC group. Longitudinal scaling improved accuracies to 0.94 for MDD, 0.90 for PD, and 0.96 for HCs, suggesting its potential in monitoring patients' conditions using HRV. The HC group demonstrated greater ΔHRV fluctuation in a larger number of and more significant features than the patient groups, potentially contributing to higher accuracy. Multilayer perceptron models provided consistent results with random forest, confirming the robustness of the findings. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that differentiating between stress and relaxation was more challenging in the PD and MDD groups than in the HC group, underscoring the potential of HRV metrics as stress biomarkers. Psychiatric patients exhibited altered autonomic responses, which may influence their stress reactivity. This indicates the need for a tailored approach to stress monitoring in these patient groups. Additionally, we emphasized the significance of longitudinal scaling in enhancing classification accuracy, which can be utilized to develop personalized monitoring technologies for psychiatric patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Byun et al. (2025) conducted an observational in Major depressive disorder and panic disorder (n=147). Personalized longitudinal scaling of HRV features for machine learning classification vs. Unscaled HRV features was evaluated on Random forest classification accuracy for distinguishing stress and relaxation tasks in MDD patients. Personalized longitudinal scaling of heart rate variability features improved the random forest classification accuracy of stress versus relaxation from 0.67 to 0.94 in patients with major depressive disorder.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: