Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32054084›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2020

Using the Personalized Advantage Index for Individual Treatment Allocation to Blended Treatment or Treatment as Usual for Depression in Secondary Care.

Nadine Friedl, Tobias Krieger, Karine Chevreul, Jean Baptiste Hazo, Jérôme Holtzmann, Mark Hoogendoorn, Annet Kleiboer, Kim Mathiasen, Antoine Urech, Heleen Riper and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Individual-Specific Animated Profiles of Mental Health.Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Nadine FriedlDepartment of Clinical Psychology, University of Bern, 3012 Bern, Switzerland.
Tobias KriegerDepartment of Clinical Psychology, University of Bern, 3012 Bern, Switzerland.
Karine ChevreulURC Eco Ile-de-France (AP-HP), Hotel Dieu, 1, Place du Parvis Notre Dame,75004 Paris, France.
Jean Baptiste HazoEceve, Unit 1123, Inserm, University of Paris, Health Economics Research Unit, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, 75004 Paris, France.
Jérôme HoltzmannUniversity Hospital Grenoble Alpes, Mood disorders and emotional pathologies Unit; Pôle de Psychiatrie,Neurologie et Rééducation Neurologique, 38043 Grenoble, France.
Mark HoogendoornDepartment of Computer Science, VU University Amsterdam Faculty of Sciences, De Boelelaan 1081m 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Annet KleiboerSection Clinical Psychology, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam and EMGO+ Institute for Health Care and Research, Van der Boechorststraat 1, 1081 BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Kim MathiasenDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, 5230 Odense M, Denmark.
Antoine UrechINSELSPITAL, University Hospital Bern, University Clinic for Neurology,University Acute-Neurorehabilitation Center; 3010 Bern, Switzerland.
Heleen RiperDepartment of Psychiatry and the Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, GGZ inGeest/Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, de Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Thomas BergerDepartment of Clinical Psychology, University of Bern, 3012 Bern, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A variety of effective psychotherapies for depression are available, but patients who suffer from depression vary in their treatment response. Combining face-to-face therapies with internet-based elements in the sense of blended treatment is a new approach to treatment for depression. The goal of this study was to answer the following research questions: (1) What are the most important predictors determining optimal treatment allocation to treatment as usual or blended treatment? and (2) Would model-determined treatment allocation using this predictive information and the personalized advantage index (PAI)-approach result in better treatment outcomes? Bayesian model averaging (BMA) was applied to the data of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing the efficacy of treatment as usual and blended treatment in depressive outpatients. Pre-treatment symptomatology and treatment expectancy predicted outcomes irrespective of treatment condition, whereas different prescriptive predictors were found. A PAI of 2.33 PHQ-9 points was found, meaning that patients who would have received the treatment that is optimal for them would have had a post-treatment PHQ-9 score that is two points lower than if they had received the treatment that is suboptimal for them. For 29% of the sample, the PAI was five or greater, which means that a substantial difference between the two treatments was predicted. The use of the PAI approach for clinical practice must be further confirmed in prospective research; the current study supports the identification of specific interventions favorable for specific patients.

Indexed as

Bayesian model averagingblended treatmentCBTdepressionpersonalized advantage indextreatment selection

Identifiers

PMID32054084
PMCPMC7073663

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.