Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41299370›Full record

ArticleBMC psychiatry2025

Development of a machine learning model for predicting compulsory psychiatric care using clinical notes.

Eline W Nap, Floortje E Scheepers, Cornelis L Mulder, Astrid M Kamperman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Eline W NapParnassia Groep, Den Haag, The Netherlands. e.nap@parnassiagroep.nl.
Floortje E ScheepersBrain Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Cornelis L MulderDepartment of Psychiatry, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Astrid M KampermanDepartment of Psychiatry, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIf patients at high risk of compulsory psychiatric care can be identified sooner, it is in some cases possible to apply stage-specific interventions that make compulsory care unnecessary. We therefore developed a machine-learning algorithm that could identify patients at risk sooner, thereby enabling timely intervention and preventive measures.

methodsAs predictors in a machine-learning model for predicting compulsory care, we used known risk factors and clinical notes registered in electronic health records during treatment at a mental health institution in the Netherlands.

resultsWe successfully built a predictive model that, with a precision of 0.91, identified just over 50% of the compulsory care trajectories (recall/sensitivity) 60 days before the start of the trajectory. The algorithm was thus able to predict more than half of the compulsory-care admissions 2 months before they took place. It correctly flagged nine out of ten cases as being at high risk for admission. A previous compulsory-care episode was the most predictive variable in our model. Incorporating text improved the model's performance, particularly when the forecast horizon was shorter.

conclusionsThis study shows that predicting adverse events is a promising line of research that may support future clinical practice. To enhance the clinical relevance of predictions, it is essential to understand the functioning of the model and its input variables.

Indexed as

Commitment of Persons with Psychiatric DisordersElectronic Health RecordsMachine LearningMental DisordersAdultAlgorithmsFemaleHospitals, PsychiatricHumansMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsRisk FactorsCompulsory careMachine learningMental healthcarePrediction

Identifiers

PMID41299370
PMCPMC12751910

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.