ArticleJournal of affective disorders2025
Reinforcement learning processes as forecasters of depression remission.
Article in Journal of affective disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
backgroundAspects of reinforcement learning have been associated with specific depression symptoms and may inform the course of depressive illness.
methodsWe applied support vector machines to investigate whether blood‑oxygen-level dependent (BOLD) responses linked with neural prediction error (nPE) and neural expected value (nEV) from a probabilistic learning task could forecast depression remission. We investigated whether predictions were moderated by treatment use or symptoms. Participants included 55 individuals (n = 39 female) with a depression diagnosis at baseline; 36 of these individuals completed standard cognitive behavioral therapy and 19 were followed during naturalistic course of illness. All participants were assessed for depression diagnosis at a follow-up visit.
resultsBoth nPE and nEV classifiers forecasted remission significantly better than null classifiers. The nEV classifier performed significantly better than the nPE classifier. We found no main or interaction effects of treatment status on nPE or nEV accuracy. We found a significant interaction between nPE-forecasted remission status and anhedonia, but not for negative affect or anxious arousal, when controlling for nEV-forecasted remission status. LIMITATIONS: Our sample size, while comparable to that of other studies, limits options for maximizing and evaluating model performance. We addressed this with two standard methods for optimizing model performance (90:10 train and test scheme and bootstrapped sampling).
conclusionsResults support nEV and nPE as relevant biobehavioral signals for understanding depression outcome independent of treatment status, with nEV being stronger than nPE as a predictor of remission. Reinforcement learning variables may be useful components of an individualized medicine framework for depression healthcare.
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.