ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2025
Attitudes towards a multimodal precision medicine algorithm for predicting treatment response in depression: findings from a large cross-sectional European survey.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
26 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Precision medicine aims to facilitate a more individualized treatment selection and a more accurate diagnosis. While there is broad ranging research on precision psychiatry and the corresponding computational tools, its concepts and implementation are underway, little is known about the attitudes towards the actual use of precision psychiatry tools in the management of major psychiatric disorders, such as Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). This study aims to investigate the attitudes of depressive patients, professionals (physicians, psychologists and scientists) and the general population towards a novel, multimodal precision medicine algorithm designed to predict antidepressant treatment response. Methods: 5490 participants from 21 European countries, consisting of three groups of stakeholders, patients with depression (n= 421), professionals (n = 367) and the general population (n = 4702), were polled with a newly developed cross-sectional survey. A hypothetical decision scenario was used to examine the participants' attitudes, in which they were asked for their approval or disapproval for the application of a multimodal precision medicine algorithm to predict treatment response in antidepressant-treatment.3. Results: The general population had an acceptance rate of 78.8%. Overall, 74.6% of patients with MDD would agree to undergo testing using the multimodal algorithm in their current situation and 80.2% reported they would have done so at the time of their first diagnosis. In contrast, the psychiatrist's acceptance rates towards a multimodal algorithm were higher when patients had been in treatment for some time (79.3%) compared to those who had only recently been diagnosed (55.2%). This pattern was present across all other specialties within the professionals group. A considerable number of participants wished to receive more information before deciding, but few declined its application altogether. All groups indicated an openness towards personalized treatment options in general. Conclusion: Overall, participants indicated a large degree of acceptance towards the application of a multimodal precision medicine algorithm. Although limited by the hypothetical nature of the decision scenario, this study provides valuable perspectives from different stakeholders. Future research should move beyond attitudes and address further implementation hurdles that need to be overcome for the successful implementation of novel precision psychiatry approaches in psychiatric care.
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.