ArticleOman medical journal2024
Estimating Optimal Treatment Rule for Major Depressive Disorder Using Penalized Regression Method.
Article in Oman medical journal, 2024. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Major depressive disorder (MDD) stands as the primary contributor to disability worldwide. Identifying optimal treatment regimens for patients with MDD using advanced statistical techniques may help improve patient outcomes and reduce the number of hospitalizations. Methods: In a group of patients with MDD from north-western Iran, we compared treatments including work therapy (WT), WT plus electroconvulsive therapy (WT + ECT), WT plus family therapy (WT + FT), and other psychotherapeutic methods (PT). We also estimated the optimal treatment rule and identified essential variables in a loss-based framework using a penalized regression method. Results: The participants were 377 MDD patients of whom 198 (52.5%) received WT alone, 95 (25.2%) received WT + ECT, and 61 (16.2%) were given WT + FT. The remaining 23 (6.1%) patients were treated with PT. A comparison of the treatments revealed that a history of emotional problems was the important variable to consider when selecting WT + ECT, WT + FT, or PT, while patient education level and history of emotional problems were both important for WT + ECT. Applying the above optimal treatment rules is likely to reduce patients' hospital stay days. Conclusions: For patients with MDD, history of emotional problems and education level were the two most important variables for estimating the optimal treatment rules, including personalizing medications. Incorporating important variables into treatment regimens is likely to improve treatment outcomes and decrease the number of hospitalizations.
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.