Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36627607›Full record

ArticleBMC psychiatry2023

The Precision in Psychiatry (PIP) study: Testing an internet-based methodology for accelerating research in treatment prediction and personalisation.

Chi Tak Lee, Jorge Palacios, Derek Richards, Anna K Hanlon, Kevin Lynch, Siobhan Harty, Nathalie Claus, Lorraine Swords, Veronica O'Keane, Klaas E Stephan and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychiatry, 2023. 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. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Review
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.

Chi Tak LeeSchool of Psychology, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Jorge PalaciosSchool of Psychology, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Derek RichardsSchool of Psychology, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Anna K HanlonSchool of Psychology, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Kevin LynchSchool of Psychology, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Siobhan HartySchool of Psychology, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Nathalie ClausDepartment of Psychology, Division of Clinical Psychology and Psychological Treatment, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany.
Lorraine SwordsSchool of Psychology, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Veronica O'KeaneTrinity College Institute of Neuroscience, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Klaas E StephanInstitute for Biomedical Engineering, Translational Neuromodeling Unit, University of Zürich & Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule, Zurich, Switzerland.
Claire M GillanSchool of Psychology, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. GILLANCL@tcd.ie.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvidence-based treatments for depression exist but not all patients benefit from them. Efforts to develop predictive models that can assist clinicians in allocating treatments are ongoing, but there are major issues with acquiring the volume and breadth of data needed to train these models. We examined the feasibility, tolerability, patient characteristics, and data quality of a novel protocol for internet-based treatment research in psychiatry that may help advance this field.

methodsA fully internet-based protocol was used to gather repeated observational data from patient cohorts receiving internet-based cognitive behavioural therapy (iCBT) (N = 600) or antidepressant medication treatment (N = 110). At baseline, participants provided > 600 data points of self-report data, spanning socio-demographics, lifestyle, physical health, clinical and other psychological variables and completed 4 cognitive tests. They were followed weekly and completed another detailed clinical and cognitive assessment at week 4. In this paper, we describe our study design, the demographic and clinical characteristics of participants, their treatment adherence, study retention and compliance, the quality of the data gathered, and qualitative feedback from patients on study design and implementation.

resultsParticipant retention was 92% at week 3 and 84% for the final assessment. The relatively short study duration of 4 weeks was sufficient to reveal early treatment effects; there were significant reductions in 11 transdiagnostic psychiatric symptoms assessed, with the largest improvement seen for depression. Most participants (66%) reported being distracted at some point during the study, 11% failed 1 or more attention checks and 3% consumed an intoxicating substance. Data quality was nonetheless high, with near perfect 4-week test retest reliability for self-reported height (ICC = 0.97).

conclusionsAn internet-based methodology can be used efficiently to gather large amounts of detailed patient data during iCBT and antidepressant treatment. Recruitment was rapid, retention was relatively high and data quality was good. This paper provides a template methodology for future internet-based treatment studies, showing that such an approach facilitates data collection at a scale required for machine learning and other data-intensive methods that hope to deliver algorithmic tools that can aid clinical decision-making in psychiatry.

Indexed as

Cognitive Behavioral TherapyPsychiatryDepressionHumansInternetReproducibility of ResultsResearch DesignSelf ReportTreatment OutcomeAntidepressantBig dataInternet-based methodologyInternet-delivered cognitive behavioural therapyMental health treatmentsTreatment outcomesTreatment predictionTreatment response

Identifiers

PMID36627607
PMCPMC9832676

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.