ArticleScientific reports2026
Evaluating clinical and neuroimaging predictors for cognitive-behavioral therapy outcome in obsessive-compulsive disorder.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) is the first-line treatment for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), yet a significant number of patients do not achieve remission or substantial symptom relief. This study aims to enhance the prediction of CBT outcomes in OCD by integrating demographic, clinical, and neuroimaging data using machine learning (ML) models. We conduct a comprehensive analysis on a well-characterized clinical sample, employing a rigorous validation scheme to avoid data leakage, and comparing multiple ML algorithms to minimize bias. Out of four different ML models trained on demographic and clinical data, structural MRI, and resting-state MRI functional connectivity data, no model was able to predict CBT success significantly above chance level in the present sample. Although clinical and demographic data enabled 64%-66% accuracy for predicting remission, this did not reach statistical significance after permutation testing. Pre-treatment symptom severity emerged numerically as the most promising predictor of remission, aligning with previous studies, but did not pass the significance threshold in the present study. Despite efforts to identify neuroimaging predictors, neither functional nor structural MRI features significantly contributed to the prediction models. These findings suggest that robust, individualized brain-based predictions for mental health outcomes remain challenging with the available data and sample size.
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.