ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2026
Task-aligned outcome learning in psychiatry: reducing endpoint dilution.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2026. 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.
- Mendelianization: Concentrating Polygenic Signal Into a Single Causal Locus.Genetic epidemiology · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Psychiatric research relies on well-defined outcomes for standardization, comparability, and replication, yet investigators often fix broad endpoints before knowing which symptom domains carry task-relevant signal. Even when psychometrically sound and clinically useful, composite measures can dilute predictive information and attenuate treatment effects when predictability or responsiveness concentrates in only a subset of symptoms-thus making studies appear negative despite meaningful change. This Perspective proposes a task-aligned, two-stage machine-learning framework for learning the appropriate outcome. In the first stage, constrained discovery derives a clinically interpretable outcome from a prespecified item pool. In the second, confirmatory evaluation tests the prespecified hypothesis either on a fixed learned outcome, when the aim is to assess a previously derived endpoint in a closely matched study, or on a relearned outcome generated by the same prespecified procedure, when the aim is to test whether that procedure can recover a task-aligned endpoint across different studies. The framework complements psychometrics and open-science practices, shifting focus from broad unsupervised composites to empirically supported targets, with safeguards to keep results interpretable and rigorous.
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.