Back

Optimizing Contingency Management with Reinforcement Learning

Kim, Y.; Brandt, L.; Cheung, K.; Nunes, E. V.; Roll, J.; Luo, S. X.; Liu, Y.

2024-03-29 psychiatry and clinical psychology
10.1101/2024.03.28.24305031 medRxiv
Show abstract

Contingency Management (CM) is a psychological treatment that aims to change behavior with financial incentives. In substance use disorders (SUDs), deployment of CM has been enriched by longstanding discussions around the cost-effectiveness of prized-based and voucher-based approaches. In prize-based CM, participants earn draws to win prizes, including small incentives to reduce costs, and the number of draws escalates depending on the duration of maintenance of abstinence. In voucher-based CM, participants receive a predetermined voucher amount based on specific substance test results. While both types have enhanced treatment outcomes, there is room for improvement in their cost-effectiveness: the voucher-based system requires enduring financial investment; the prize-based system might sacrifice efficacy. Previous work in computational psychiatry of SUDs typically employs frameworks wherein participants make decisions to maximize their expected compensation. In contrast, we developed new frameworks that clinical decision-makers choose actions, CM structures, to reinforce the substance abstinence behavior of participants. We consider the choice of the voucher or prize to be a sequential decision, where there are two pivotal parameters: the prize probability for each draw and the escalation rule determining the number of draws. Recent advancements in Reinforcement Learning, more specifically, in off-policy evaluation, afforded techniques to estimate outcomes for different CM decision scenarios from observed clinical trial data. We searched CM schemas that maximized treatment outcomes with budget constraints. Using this framework, we analyzed data from the Clinical Trials Network to construct unbiased estimators on the effects of new CM schemas. Our results indicated that the optimal CM schema would be to strengthen reinforcement rapidly in the middle of the treatment course. Our estimated optimal CM policy improved treatment outcomes by 32% while maintaining costs. Our methods and results have broad applications in future clinical trial planning and translational investigations on the neurobiological basis of SUDs.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Computational Psychiatry
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
17.9%
2
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 27%
6.7%
3
Biological Psychiatry
119 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
6.2%
4
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 6%
6.2%
5
Biological Psychiatry: Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging
62 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.2%
6
Frontiers in Psychiatry
83 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
4.7%
7
Nature Medicine
117 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
4.7%
50% of probability mass above
8
Neuropsychopharmacology
134 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
4.2%
9
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 20%
3.6%
10
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 27%
3.5%
11
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.0%
12
Biological Psychiatry Global Open Science
54 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.0%
13
Translational Psychiatry
219 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.0%
14
Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
15
NeuroImage: Clinical
132 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.6%
16
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 61%
1.6%
17
Nature Neuroscience
216 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.5%
18
NeuroImage
813 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.3%
19
Psychological Medicine
74 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
20
Journal of Affective Disorders
81 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
21
Science Advances
1098 papers in training set
Top 25%
0.9%
22
Molecular Psychiatry
242 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
23
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 67%
0.8%
24
JAMA Psychiatry
13 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.8%
25
Communications Psychology
20 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.7%
26
Communications Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
27
Nature Genetics
240 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.7%
28
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.7%
29
Science
429 papers in training set
Top 22%
0.6%
30
Nature Machine Intelligence
61 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%