Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33479383›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Predictive modeling of depression and anxiety using electronic health records and a novel machine learning approach with artificial intelligence.

Matthew D Nemesure, Michael V Heinz, Raphael Huang, Nicholas C Jacobson

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 78 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
78citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
32.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

78 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 209 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

18 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Matthew D NemesureCenter for Technology and Behavioral Health, Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth College, 46 Centerra Parkway, Lebanon, NH, 03766, USA. matthew.d.nemesure.gr@dartmouth.edu.
Michael V HeinzCenter for Technology and Behavioral Health, Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth College, 46 Centerra Parkway, Lebanon, NH, 03766, USA.
Raphael HuangCenter for Technology and Behavioral Health, Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth College, 46 Centerra Parkway, Lebanon, NH, 03766, USA.
Nicholas C JacobsonCenter for Technology and Behavioral Health, Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth College, 46 Centerra Parkway, Lebanon, NH, 03766, USA.
Dartmouth College · US

Funding

Treatment Development & Evaluation CoreP30DA029926 · NIDA · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI Lisa A. Marsch · 2011 to 2026
$21.5M
Training in the Science of Co-Occurring DisordersT32DA037202 · NIDA · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI Lisa A. Marsch · 2014 to 2026
$4.7M
NIDA NIH HHS P30 DA029926NIDA NIH HHS P30DA02992610NIDA NIH HHS T32 DA037202
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and major depressive disorder (MDD) are highly prevalent and impairing problems, but frequently go undetected, leading to substantial treatment delays. Electronic health records (EHRs) collect a great deal of biometric markers and patient characteristics that could foster the detection of GAD and MDD in primary care settings. We approached the problem of predicting MDD and GAD using a novel machine learning pipeline to re-analyze data from an observational study. The pipeline constitutes an ensemble of algorithmically distinct machine learning methods, including deep learning. A sample of 4,184 undergraduate students completed the study, undergoing a general health screening and completing a psychiatric assessment for MDD and GAD. After explicitly excluding all psychiatric information, 59 biomedical and demographic features from the general health survey in addition to a set of engineered features were used for model training. We assessed the model's performance on a held-out test set and found an AUC of 0.73 (sensitivity: 0.66, specificity: 0.7) and 0.67 (sensitivity: 0.55, specificity: 0.7) for GAD, and MDD, respectively. Additionally, we used advanced techniques (SHAP values) to illuminate which features had the greatest impact on prediction for each disease. The top predictive features for MDD were being satisfied with living conditions and having public health insurance. The top predictive features for GAD were vaccinations being up to date and marijuana use. Our results indicate moderate predictive performance for the application of machine learning methods in detection of GAD and MDD based on EHR data. By identifying important predictors of GAD and MDD, these results may be used in future research to aid in the early detection of MDD and GAD.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAnxietyAnxiety DisordersArtificial IntelligenceDepressionElectronic Health RecordsFemaleHumansMachine LearningMajor Depressive DisorderMalePrimary Health CarePsychiatric Status Rating ScalesSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID33479383
PMCPMC7820000
OpenAlexW3121633856

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.