Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34541567›Full record

ArticleJournal of affective disorders reports2021

Predicting outcomes of psychotherapy for depression with electronic health record data.

R Yates Coley, Jennifer M Boggs, Arne Beck, Gregory E Simon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of affective disorders reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Predicting the outcome of psychotherapy for chronic depression by person-specific symptom networks.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. 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

4 authors.

R Yates ColeyKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institutes, Seattle, WA, USA.
Jennifer M BoggsInstitute for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Colorado, Denver, CO, USA.
Arne BeckInstitute for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Colorado, Denver, CO, USA.
Gregory E SimonKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institutes, Seattle, WA, USA.

Funding

CATALyST: Consortium for Applied Training to Advance the Learning health system with Scholars/TraineesK12HS026369 · AHRQ · KAISER FOUNDATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI LOZANO, PAULA, RALSTON, JAMES D. · 2018 to 2022
$3.5M
AHRQ HHS K12 HS026369
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Predictive analytics with electronic health record (EHR) data holds promise for improving outcomes of psychiatric care. This study evaluated models for predicting outcomes of psychotherapy for depression in a clinical practice setting. EHR data from two large integrated health systems (Kaiser Permanente Colorado and Washington) included 5,554 new psychotherapy episodes with a baseline Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) score ≥ 10 and a follow-up PHQ-9 14-180 days after treatment initiation. Baseline predictors included demographics and diagnostic, medication, and encounter history. Prediction models for two outcomes-follow-up PHQ-9 score and treatment response (≥ 50% PHQ-9 reduction)-were trained in a random sample of 70% of episodes and validated in the remaining 30%. Two methods were used for modeling: generalized linear regression models with variable selection and random forests. Sensitivity analyses considered alternate predictor, outcome, and model specifications. Predictions of follow-up PHQ-9 scores poorly estimated observed outcomes (mean squared error = 31 for linear regression, 40 for random forest). Predictions of treatment response had low discrimination (AUC = 0.57 for logistic regression, 0.61 for random forest), low classification accuracy, and poor calibration. Sensitivity analyses showed similar results. We note that prediction model performance may vary for settings with different care or EHR documentation practices. In conclusion, prediction models did not accurately predict depression treatment outcomes despite using rich EHR data and advanced analytic techniques. Health systems should proceed cautiously when considering prediction models for psychiatric outcomes using baseline intake information. Transparent research should be conducted to evaluate performance of any model intended for clinical use.

Indexed as

DepressionMachine learningMeasurement-based carePatient-reported outcomesPredictionQuality measures

Identifiers

PMID34541567
PMCPMC8448296

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.