ArticleClinical and translational science2022
An exploratory machine learning approach to identify placebo responders in pharmacological binge eating disorder trials.
Article in Clinical and translational science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 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
- Machine learning-based pan-cancer study of classification and mechanism of BRAF inhibitor resistance.Translational cancer research · 2024Article
- An exploratory machine learning approach to identify placebo responders in pharmacological binge eating disorder trials.Clinical and translational science · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Randomized, placebo-controlled trials for binge eating disorder (BED) have revealed highly variable, and often marked, rates of short-term placebo response. Several quantitative based analyses in patients with BED have inconsistently demonstrated which patient factors attribute to an increase in placebo response. The objective of this study is to utilize machine learning (ML) algorithms to identify moderators of placebo response in patients with BED. Data were pooled from 12 randomized placebo-controlled trials evaluating different treatment options for BED. The final dataset consisted of 189 adults receiving placebo with complete information of baseline variables. Placebo responders were defined as patients experiencing ≥75% reduction in binge eating frequency (BEF) at study end point. Nine patient prerandomization variables were included as predictors. Patients were divided into training and testing subsets according to an 75%:25% distribution while preserving the proportion of placebo responders. All analysis was performed in the software Pumas 2.0. Gaussian Naïve Bayes algorithm showed the best cross-validation accuracy (~64%) and was chosen as the final algorithm. Shapley analysis suggested that patients with low baseline BEF and anxiety status were strong moderators of placebo response. Upon applying the final algorithm on the test dataset, the resulting sensitivity was 88% and prediction accuracy was 72%. This is the first application of ML to identify moderators of placebo response in BED. The results of this analysis confirm previous findings of lesser baseline disease severity and adds that patients with no anxiety are more susceptible to placebo 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.