Development of a differential treatment selection model for depression on consolidated and transformed clinical trial datasets
Perlman, K.; Mehltretter, J.; Benrimoh, D.; Armstrong, C.; Fratila, R.; Popescu, C.; Tunteng, J.-F.; Williams, J.; Rollins, C.; Golden, G.; Turecki, G.
Show abstract
ObjectiveMajor depressive disorder (MDD) is the leading cause of disability worldwide, yet treatment selection still proceeds via "trial and error". Given the varied presentation of MDD and heterogeneity of treatment response, the use of machine learning to understand complex, non-linear relationships in data may be key for treatment personalization. Well-organized, structured data from clinical trials with standardized outcome measures is useful for training machine learning models; however, combining data across trials poses numerous challenges. There is also persistent concern that machine learning models can propagate harmful biases. MethodsWe have created a methodology for organizing and preprocessing depression clinical trial data such that transformed variables harmonized across disparate datasets can be used as input for feature selection. Using bayesian optimization, we identified an optimal multi-layer dense neural network which used data from 21 clinical and sociodemographic features as input in order to perform differential treatment benefit prediction. ResultsWith this combined dataset of 5032 individuals and 6 drugs, we created a differential treatment benefit prediction model. Our model generalized well to the held-out test set and produced similar accuracy metrics in the test and validation set with an AUC of 0.7 when predicting binary remission. To address the potential for bias propagation, we used a bias testing performance metric to evaluate the model for harmful biases related to ethnicity, age, or sex. ConclusionWe present a full pipeline from data preprocessing to model validation that was employed to create the first differential treatment benefit prediction model for MDD containing 6 treatment options.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Depression is Associated with Treatment Response Trajectories in Adults with Prolonged Grief Disorder: A Machine Learning Analysis 95%
- Exploring the Efficacy and Potential of Large Language Models for Depression: A Systematic Review 94%
- The Cost-Effectiveness Of Depression Screening For The General Adult Population 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Machine Learning Models Predict the Emergence of Depression in Argentinean College Students during Periods of COVID-19 Quarantine 95%
- Applications of Large Language Models in Psychiatry: A Systematic Review 93%
- Computational Psychiatry Research Map (CPSYMAP): a New Database for Visualizing Research Papers 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- A Comparison of Pruning During Multi-Step Planning in Depressed and Healthy Individuals 92%
- Predicting involuntary admission following inpatient psychiatric treatment using machine learning trained on electronic health record data 92%
- Antipsychotic Polypharmacy and Adverse Drug Reactions Among Adults in a London Mental Health Service, 2008-2018 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Differential Treatment Benefit Prediction For Treatment Selection in Depression: A Deep Learning Analysis of STAR*D and CO-MED Data 98%
- Computational Mechanisms of Approach-Avoidance Conflict Predictively Differentiate Between Affective and Substance Use Disorders 93%
- Computational modelling reveals slower safety learning and threat extinction are associated with higher anxiety severity in remote fear conditioning 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Lexical Stability of Psychiatric Clinical Notes from Electronic Health Records over a Decade 93%
- Research and Diagnostic Algorithmic Rules (RADAR) for mood disorders, recurrence of illness, suicidal behaviors, and the patient’s lifetime trajectory 93%
- Monitoring of COVID-19 Pandemic-related Psychopathology using Machine Learning 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.