» Articles » PMID: 31841022

Personalized Prognostic Prediction of Treatment Outcome for Depressed Patients in a Naturalistic Psychiatric Hospital Setting: A Comparison of Machine Learning Approaches

Overview
Specialty Psychology
Date 2019 Dec 17
PMID 31841022
Citations 28
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: Research on predictors of treatment outcome in depression has largely derived from randomized clinical trials involving strict standardization of treatments, stringent patient exclusion criteria, and careful selection and supervision of study clinicians. The extent to which findings from such studies generalize to naturalistic psychiatric settings is unclear. This study sought to predict depression outcomes for patients seeking treatment within an intensive psychiatric hospital setting and while comparing the performance of a range of machine learning approaches.

Method: Depressed patients (N = 484; ages 18-72; 89% White) receiving treatment within a psychiatric partial hospital program delivering pharmacotherapy and cognitive behavioral therapy were split into a training sample and holdout sample. First, within the training sample, 51 pretreatment variables were submitted to 13 machine learning algorithms to predict, via cross-validation, posttreatment Patient Health Questionnaire-9 depression scores. Second, the best performing modeling approach (lowest mean squared error; MSE) from the training sample was selected to predict outcome in the holdout sample.

Results: The best performing model in the training sample was elastic net regularization (ENR; MSE = 20.49, R2 = .28), which had comparable performance in the holdout sample (MSE = 11.26; R2 = .38). There were 14 pretreatment variables that predicted outcome. To demonstrate the translation of an ENR model to personalized prediction of treatment outcome, a patient-specific prognosis calculator is presented.

Conclusions: Informed by pretreatment patient characteristics, such predictive models could be used to communicate prognosis to clinicians and to guide treatment planning. Identified predictors of poor prognosis may suggest important targets for intervention. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Citing Articles

Can psychedelic use benefit meditation practice? Examining individual, psychedelic, and meditation-related factors.

Jiwani Z, Goldberg S, Stroud J, Young J, Curtin J, Dunne J PLoS One. 2025; 20(2):e0310160.

PMID: 39937729 PMC: 11819602. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0310160.


Diagnosis of Schizophrenia and Its Subtypes Using MRI and Machine Learning.

Tavakoli H, Rostami R, Shalbaf R, Nazem-Zadeh M Brain Behav. 2024; 15(1):e70219.

PMID: 39740776 PMC: 11688118. DOI: 10.1002/brb3.70219.


Leveraging Stacked Classifiers for Multi-task Executive Function in Schizophrenia Yields Diagnostic and Prognostic Insights.

Zhang T, Zhao X, Yeo B, Huo X, Eickhoff S, Chen J medRxiv. 2024; .

PMID: 39677485 PMC: 11643294. DOI: 10.1101/2024.12.05.24318587.


Methodological choices and clinical usefulness for machine learning predictions of outcome in Internet-based cognitive behavioural therapy.

Hentati Isacsson N, Ben Abdesslem F, Forsell E, Boman M, Kaldo V Commun Med (Lond). 2024; 4(1):196.

PMID: 39384934 PMC: 11464669. DOI: 10.1038/s43856-024-00626-4.


Machine learning and Bayesian network analyses identifies associations with insomnia in a national sample of 31,285 treatment-seeking college students.

Calderon A, Baik S, Ng M, Fitzsimmons-Craft E, Eisenberg D, Wilfley D BMC Psychiatry. 2024; 24(1):656.

PMID: 39367432 PMC: 11452987. DOI: 10.1186/s12888-024-06074-7.


References
1.
Waldmann P, Meszaros G, Gredler B, Fuerst C, Solkner J . Evaluation of the lasso and the elastic net in genome-wide association studies. Front Genet. 2013; 4:270. PMC: 3850240. DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2013.00270. View

2.
McEvoy P, Nathan P . Effectiveness of cognitive behavior therapy for diagnostically heterogeneous groups: a benchmarking study. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2007; 75(2):344-50. DOI: 10.1037/0022-006X.75.2.344. View

3.
Zeeck A, von Wietersheim J, Weiss H, Scheidt C, Volker A, Helesic A . Prognostic and prescriptive predictors of improvement in a naturalistic study on inpatient and day hospital treatment of depression. J Affect Disord. 2016; 197:205-14. DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2016.03.039. View

4.
Harris P, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde J . Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2008; 42(2):377-81. PMC: 2700030. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010. View

5.
Spitzer R, Kroenke K, Williams J, Lowe B . A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7. Arch Intern Med. 2006; 166(10):1092-7. DOI: 10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092. View