Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38906883›Full record

ArticleTranslational psychiatry2024

Development of a differential treatment selection model for depression on consolidated and transformed clinical trial datasets.

Kelly Perlman, Joseph Mehltretter, David Benrimoh, Caitrin Armstrong, Robert Fratila, Christina Popescu, Jingla-Fri Tunteng, Jerome Williams, Colleen Rollins, Grace Golden and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Towards causal inference-based antidepressant selection with brain and blood biomarkers.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
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.

Kelly Perlman *Douglas Mental Health University Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada. kelly.perlman@mail.mcgill.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-2716-0712
Joseph Mehltretter *Aifred Health Inc., Montreal, QC, Canada.
David Benrimoh *Douglas Mental Health University Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-1452-4791
Caitrin ArmstrongAifred Health Inc., Montreal, QC, Canada.
Robert FratilaAifred Health Inc., Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3292-6233
Christina PopescuAifred Health Inc., Montreal, QC, Canada.
Jingla-Fri TuntengMcGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Jerome WilliamsMcGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8871-2509
Colleen RollinsMcGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Grace GoldenAifred Health Inc., Montreal, QC, Canada.
Gustavo TureckiDouglas Mental Health University Institute, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4075-2736

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Bayes TheoremMachine LearningMajor Depressive DisorderAdultAntidepressive AgentsClinical Trials as TopicFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeural Networks, ComputerAntidepressive Agents

Identifiers

PMID38906883
PMCPMC11192904

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.