ArticleJMIR medical informatics2023
Predicting Undesired Treatment Outcomes With Machine Learning in Mental Health Care: Multisite Study.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
- Artificial intelligence in interventional cardiology: a review of its role in diagnosis, decision-making, and procedural precision.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Review
- The Future of Artificial Intelligence in Mental Health Nursing Practice: An Integrative Review.International journal of mental health nursing · 2025Review
- The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Improving Patient Outcomes and Future of Healthcare Delivery in Cardiology: A Narrative Review of the Literature.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Personalized Approaches to Cardiovascular Disease: Insights into FDA-Approved Interventions and Clinical Pharmacogenetics.Current pharmaceutical design · 2024Review
- Prediction of acute kidney injury in intensive care unit patients based on interpretable machine learning.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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Predicting which treatment will work for which patient in mental health care remains a challenge. Objective: The aim of this multisite study was 2-fold: (1) to predict patients' response to treatment in Dutch basic mental health care using commonly available data from routine care and (2) to compare the performance of these machine learning models across three different mental health care organizations in the Netherlands by using clinically interpretable models. Methods: Using anonymized data sets from three different mental health care organizations in the Netherlands (n=6452), we applied a least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression 3 times to predict the treatment outcome. The algorithms were internally validated with cross-validation within each site and externally validated on the data from the other sites. Results: The performance of the algorithms, measured by the area under the curve of the internal validations as well as the corresponding external validations, ranged from 0.77 to 0.80. Conclusions: Machine learning models provide a robust and generalizable approach in automated risk signaling technology to identify cases at risk of poor treatment outcomes. The results of this study hold substantial implications for clinical practice by demonstrating that the performance of a model derived from one site is similar when applied to another site (ie, good external validation).
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.