ArticleJournal of anxiety disorders2025
Development of a machine learning-based multivariable prediction model for the naturalistic course of generalized anxiety disorder.
Article in Journal of anxiety disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Artificial Intelligence for Predicting Treatment Response in Patients With Anxiety Disorders After Cognitive Behavioral Therapy: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Machine learning approaches to anxiety detection: trends, model evaluation, and future directions.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025Pooled it
- Factors underpinning international student mental well-being: a UK and China survey.BMJ mental health · 2026Article
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
Abstract
backgroundGeneralized Anxiety Disorder (GAD) is a chronic condition. Enabling the prediction of individual trajectories would facilitate tailored management approaches for these individuals. This study used machine learning techniques to predict the recovery of GAD at a nine-year follow-up.
methodThe study involved 126 participants with GAD. Various baseline predictors from psychological, social, biological, sociodemographic and health variables were used. Two machine learning models, gradient boosted trees, and elastic nets were compared to predict the clinical course in participants with GAD.
resultsAt nine-year follow-up, 95 participants (75.40 %) recovered. Elastic nets achieved a cross-validated area-under-the-receiving-operator-characteristic-curve (AUC) of .81 and a balanced accuracy of 72 % (sensitivity of .70 and specificity of .76). The elastic net algorithm revealed that the following factors were highly predictive of nonrecovery at follow-up: higher depressed affect, experiencing daily discrimination, more mental health professional visits, and more medical professional visits. The following variables predicted recovery: having some college education or higher, older age, more friend support, higher waist-to-hip ratio, and higher positive affect.
conclusionsThere was acceptable performance in predicting recovery or nonrecovery at a nine-year follow-up. This study advances research on GAD outcomes by understanding predictors associated with recovery or nonrecovery. Findings can potentially inform more targeted preventive interventions, ultimately improving care for individuals with GAD. This work is a critical first step toward developing reliable and feasible machine learning-based predictions for applications to GAD.
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.