ArticleNPJ digital medicine2025
Prediction of individual treatment allocation between electroconvulsive therapy or ketamine using the Personalized Advantage Index.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Personalized Treatment Selection for Digital Eating Disorder Interventions: A Proof-of-Concept for the Personalized Advantage Index.The International journal of eating disorders · 2026Trial
- Neurobiological mechanisms of electroconvulsive therapy in major depressive disorder: structure-function coupling with gene expression and molecular mechanism.Translational psychiatry · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and ketamine are effective treatments for depression; however, evidence-based guidelines are needed to inform individual treatment selection. We adapted the Personalized Advantage Index (PAI) using machine learning to predict optimal treatment assignment to ECT or ketamine using EHR data on 2506 ECT and 196 ketamine patients. Depressive symptoms were evaluated using the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS) before and during acute treatment. Propensity score matching across treatments was used to address confounding by indication, yielding a sample of 392 patients (n = 196 per treatment). Models predicted differential minimum QIDS scores (min-QIDS) over acute treatment using pretreatment EHR measures and SHAP values identified prescriptive predictors. Patients with large PAI scores who received a predicted optimal had significantly lower min-QIDS compared to the non-optimal treatment group (mean difference = 1.19 [95% CI: 0.32, ∞], t = 2.25, q < 0.05, d = 0.26). Our model identified candidate pretreatment factors to provide actionable, effective antidepressant treatment selection guidelines.
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.