ArticleTranslational psychiatry2024
Development of a differential treatment selection model for depression on consolidated and transformed clinical trial datasets.
Article in Translational psychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 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
- Towards causal inference-based antidepressant selection with brain and blood biomarkers.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026Trial
- A data-centric approach to detecting and mitigating demographic bias in pediatric mental health text.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Machine learning-based prediction of long-term prognosis in cervical adenocarcinoma: a retrospective cohort study.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- The Use of Artificial Intelligence for Personalized Treatment in Psychiatry.Current psychiatry reports · 2025Review
- A scoping review of artificial intelligence applications in clinical trial risk assessment.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Development of the treatment prediction model in the artificial intelligence in depression - medication enhancement study.Npj mental health research · 2025Article
- Investigating the Impact of rTMS in Combination With Antidepressant Medications on Residual Symptoms in Acute Depression.Actas espanolas de psiquiatria · 2025Article
- Machine learning meta-analysis identifies individual characteristics moderating cognitive intervention efficacy for anxiety and depression symptoms.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Major depressive disorder (MDD) is the leading cause of disability worldwide, yet treatment selection still proceeds via "trial and error". Given the varied presentation of MDD and heterogeneity of treatment response, the use of machine learning to understand complex, non-linear relationships in data may be key for treatment personalization. Well-organized, structured data from clinical trials with standardized outcome measures is useful for training machine learning models; however, combining data across trials poses numerous challenges. There is also persistent concern that machine learning models can propagate harmful biases. We have created a methodology for organizing and preprocessing depression clinical trial data such that transformed variables harmonized across disparate datasets can be used as input for feature selection. Using Bayesian optimization, we identified an optimal multi-layer dense neural network that used data from 21 clinical and sociodemographic features as input in order to perform differential treatment benefit prediction. With this combined dataset of 5032 individuals and 6 drugs, we created a differential treatment benefit prediction model. Our model generalized well to the held-out test set and produced similar accuracy metrics in the test and validation set with an AUC of 0.7 when predicting binary remission. To address the potential for bias propagation, we used a bias testing performance metric to evaluate the model for harmful biases related to ethnicity, age, or sex. We present a full pipeline from data preprocessing to model validation that was employed to create the first differential treatment benefit prediction model for MDD containing 6 treatment options.
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.