ArticleClinical and translational science2025
Comparison of Different Machine Learning Methodologies for Predicting the Non-Specific Treatment Response in Placebo Controlled Major Depressive Disorder Clinical Trials.
Article in Clinical and translational science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Machine Learning for Comparative Antidepressant Selection in Major Depressive Disorder: Systematic Review.JMIR mental health · 2026Pooled it
- Patterns of seizure frequency reduction in clinical trial participants with lower baseline seizure frequency.Epilepsia · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Clinical and Translational Science: From Bench Insights to Bedside Impact.Clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence and the future of clinical trials.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Placebo effect represents a serious confounder for the assessment of treatment effect to the extent that it has become increasingly difficult to develop antidepressant medications appropriate for outperforming placebo. Treatment effect in randomized, placebo-controlled trials, is usually estimated by the mean baseline adjusted difference of treatment response in active and placebo arms and is function of treatment-specific and non-specific effects. The non-specific treatment effect varies subject by subject conditional to the individual propensity to respond to placebo. This effect is not estimable at an individual level using the conventional parallel-group study design, since each subject enrolled in the trial is assigned to receive either active treatment or placebo, but not both. The objective of this study was to conduct a comparative analysis of the machine learning methodologies to estimate the individual probability of a non-specific treatment effect. The estimated probability is expected to support novel methodological approaches for better controlling effect of excessively high placebo response. At this purpose, six machine learning methodologies (gradient boosting machine, lasso regression, logistic regression, support vector machines, k-nearest neighbors, and random forests) were compared to the multilayer perceptrons artificial neural network (ANN) methodology for predicting the probability of individual non-specific treatment response. ANN achieved the highest overall accuracy among all methods tested. A fivefold cross-validation was used to assess performances and risks of overfitting of the ANN model. The analysis conducted without subjects with non-specific effect indicated a significant increase of signal detection with significant increase in effect size.
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.