ArticleScientific reports2022
Predicting non-response to multimodal day clinic treatment in severely impaired depressed patients: a machine learning approach.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Machine learning in the prediction of treatment response for emotional disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical psychology review · 2025Pooled it
- Effects of an Artificial Intelligence Platform for Behavioral Interventions on Depression and Anxiety Symptoms: Randomized Clinical Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Trial
- Factors linked to depressive symptoms in obsessive-compulsive disorder: a machine learning and network analysis from China OCD Cohort (COCC).BMC psychiatry · 2026Article
- Integration of Multi-Modal Biosensing Approaches for Depression: Current Status, Challenges, and Future Perspectives.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- The application of artificial intelligence in insomnia, anxiety, and depression: A bibliometric analysis.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A considerable number of depressed patients do not respond to treatment. Accurate prediction of non-response to routine clinical care may help in treatment planning and improve results. A longitudinal sample of N = 239 depressed patients was assessed at admission to multi-modal day clinic treatment, after six weeks, and at discharge. First, patient's treatment response was modelled by identifying longitudinal trajectories using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-17). Then, individual items of the HDRS-17 at admission as well as individual patient characteristics were entered as predictors of response/non-response trajectories into the binary classification model (eXtremeGradient Boosting; XGBoost). The model was evaluated on a hold-out set and explained in human-interpretable form by SHapley Additive explanation (SHAP) values. The prediction model yielded a multi-class AUC = 0.80 in the hold-out set. The predictive power for the binary classification yielded an AUC = 0.83 (sensitivity = .80, specificity = .77). Most relevant predictors for non-response were insomnia symptoms, younger age, anxiety symptoms, depressed mood, being unemployed, suicidal ideation and somatic symptoms of depressive disorder. Non-responders to routine treatment for depression can be identified and screened for potential next-generation treatments. Such predictors may help personalize treatment and improve treatment response.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.