Dynamic prediction of psychological treatment outcomes: development and validation of a prediction model using routinely collected symptom data

被引:0
作者
Bone, Claire [1 ]
Simmonds-Buckley, Melanie [1 ]
Thwaites, Richard [2 ]
Sandford, David [3 ]
Merzhvynska, Mariia [4 ]
Rubel, Julian [5 ]
Deisenhofer, Anne-Katharina [6 ]
Lutz, Wolfgang [6 ]
Delgadillo, Jaime [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sheffield, Dept Psychol, Clin Psychol Unit, Sheffield S1 2LT, S Yorkshire, England
[2] Cumbria Northumberland Tyne & Wear NHS Fdn Trust, Penrith, England
[3] Lancashire & South Cumbria NHS Fdn Trust, Preston, Lancs, England
[4] Univ Zurich, Dept Psychol, Zurich, Switzerland
[5] Justus Liebig Univ Giessen, Dept Psychol, Giessen, Germany
[6] Univ Trier, Dept Psychol, Trier, Germany
来源
LANCET DIGITAL HEALTH | 2021年 / 3卷 / 04期
关键词
ANXIETY DISORDERS; DEPRESSION; PSYCHOTHERAPY; PATIENT; RISK; COEFFICIENT; FEEDBACK; THERAPY; SYSTEM;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R-058 [];
学科分类号
摘要
Background Common mental disorders can be effectively treated with psychotherapy, but some patients do not respond well and require timely identification to prevent treatment failure. We aimed to develop and validate a dynamic model to predict psychological treatment outcomes, and to compare the model with currently used methods, including expected treatment response models and machine learning models. Methods In this prediction model development and validation study, we obtained data from two UK studies including patients who had accessed therapy via Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) services managed by ten UK National Health Service (NHS) Trusts between March, 2012, and June, 2018, to predict treatment outcomes. In study 1, we used data on patient-reported depression (Patient Health Questionnaire 9 [PHQ-9]) and anxiety (Generalised Anxiety Disorder 7 [GAD-71) symptom measures obtained on a session-by-session basis (Leeds Community Healthcare NHS Trust dataset; n=2317) to train the Oracle dynamic prediction model using iterative logistic regression analysis. The outcome of interest was reliable and clinically significant improvement in depression (PHQ-9) and anxiety (GAD-7) symptoms. The predictive accuracy of the model was assessed in an external test sample (Cumbria Northumberland Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust dataset; n=2036) using the area under the curve (AUC), positive predictive values (PPVs), and negative predictive values (NPVs). In study 2, we retrained the Oracle algorithm using a multiservice sample (South West Yorkshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, North East London NHS Foundation Trust, Cheshire and Wirral Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, and Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust; n=42992) and compared its performance with an expected treatment response model and five machine learning models (Bayesian updating algorithm, elastic net regularisation, extreme gradient boosting, support vector machine, and neural networks based on a rnultilayer perceptron algorithm) in an external test sample (Whittington Health NHS Trust; Barnet Enfield and Haringey Mental Health Trust; Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust; and Humber NHS Foundation Trust; n=30026). Findings The Oracle algorithm trained using iterative logistic regressions generalised well to external test samples, explaining up to 47.3% of variability in treatment outcomes. Prediction accuracy was modest at session one (AUC 0.59 [95% CI 0.55-0-62], PPV 0.63, NPV 0.61), but improved over time, reaching high prediction accuracy (AUC 0.81 [0.77-0.86], PPV 0.79, NPV 0.69) as early as session seven. The performance of the Oracle model was similar to complex (eg, including patient profiling variables) and computationally intensive machine learning models (eg, neural networks based on a multilayer perceptron algorithm, extreme gradient boosting). Furthermore, the predictive accuracy of a more simple dynamic algorithm including only baseline and index-session scores was comparable to more complex algorithms that included additional predictors modelling sample-level and individual-level variability. Overall, the Oracle algorithm significantly outperformed the expected treatment response model (mean AUC 0.80 vs 0.70, p<0.00011). Interpretation Dynamic prediction models using sparse and readily available symptom measures are capable of predicting psychotherapy outcomes with high accuracy. Copyright (C) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:E231 / E240
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
[41]   Development and validation of prediction model for incident overactive bladder: The Nagahama study [J].
Funada, Satoshi ;
Luo, Yan ;
Yoshioka, Takashi ;
Setoh, Kazuya ;
Tabara, Yasuharu ;
Negoro, Hiromitsu ;
Yoshimura, Koji ;
Matsuda, Fumihiko ;
Efthimiou, Orestis ;
Ogawa, Osamu ;
Furukawa, Toshi A. ;
Kobayashi, Takashi ;
Akamatsu, Shusuke .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2022, 29 (07) :748-756
[42]   Validation of a Clinical Prediction Model for the Development of Neuromuscular Scoliosis: A Multinational Study [J].
Bertoncelli, Carlo M. ;
Bertoncelli, Domenico ;
Elbaum, Leonard ;
Latalski, Michal ;
Altamura, Paola ;
Musoff, Charles ;
Rampal, Virginie ;
Solla, Federico .
PEDIATRIC NEUROLOGY, 2018, 79 :14-20
[43]   Development and validation of a prediction model for functional decline in older medical inpatients [J].
Takada, Toshihiko ;
Fukuma, Shingo ;
Yamamoto, Yosuke ;
Tsugihashi, Yukio ;
Nagano, Hiroyuki ;
Hayashi, Michio ;
Miyashita, Jun ;
Azuma, Teruhisa ;
Fukuhara, Shunichi .
ARCHIVES OF GERONTOLOGY AND GERIATRICS, 2018, 77 :184-188
[44]   Development and external validation of a head and neck cancer risk prediction model [J].
Smith, Craig D. L. ;
Mcmahon, Alex D. ;
Lyall, Donald M. ;
Goulart, Mariel ;
Inman, Gareth J. ;
Ross, Al ;
Gormley, Mark ;
Dudding, Tom ;
Macfarlane, Gary J. ;
Robinson, Max ;
Richiardi, Lorenzo ;
Serraino, Diego ;
Polesel, Jerry ;
Canova, Cristina ;
Ahrens, Wolfgang ;
Healy, Claire M. ;
Lagiou, Pagona ;
Holcatova, Ivana ;
Alemany, Laia ;
Znoar, Ariana ;
Waterboer, Tim ;
Brennan, Paul ;
Virani, Shama ;
Conway, David I. .
HEAD AND NECK-JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENCES AND SPECIALTIES OF THE HEAD AND NECK, 2024, 46 (09) :2261-2273
[45]   Development and Validation of a Deep Learning Model for Prediction of Adult Physiological Deterioration [J].
Shashikumar, Supreeth P. ;
Le, Joshua Pei ;
Yung, Nathan ;
Ford, James ;
Singh, Karandeep ;
Malhotra, Atul ;
Nemati, Shamim ;
Wardi, Gabriel .
CRITICAL CARE EXPLORATIONS, 2024, 6 (09) :e1151
[46]   Development and validation of a prediction model for opioid use disorder among youth [J].
Wagner, Nicole M. ;
Binswanger, Ingrid A. ;
Shetterly, Susan M. ;
Rinehart, Deborah J. ;
Wain, Kris F. ;
Hopfer, Christian ;
Glanz, Jason M. .
DRUG AND ALCOHOL DEPENDENCE, 2021, 227
[47]   Development and validation of a preoperative prediction model for geriatric emergency general surgery [J].
Xu, Dequan ;
Zhou, Haoxin ;
Hou, Limin .
LANGENBECKS ARCHIVES OF SURGERY, 2025, 410 (01)
[48]   Sensing Psychological Well-being Using Social Media Language: Prediction Model Development Study [J].
Han, Nuo ;
Li, Sijia ;
Huang, Feng ;
Wen, Yeye ;
Wang, Xiaoyang ;
Liu, Xiaoqian ;
Li, Linyan ;
Zhu, Tingshao .
JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INTERNET RESEARCH, 2023, 25
[49]   An enhanced version of FREM (Fracture Risk Evaluation Model) using national administrative health data: analysis protocol for development and validation of a multivariable prediction model [J].
Kristensen, Simon Bang ;
Clausen, Anne ;
Skjodt, Michael Kriegbaum ;
Sondergaard, Jens ;
Abrahamsen, Bo ;
Moeller, Soeren ;
Rubin, Katrine Hass .
DIAGNOSTIC AND PROGNOSTIC RESEARCH, 2023, 7 (01)
[50]   Predicting treatment resistance in positive and negative symptom domains from first episode psychosis: Development of a clinical prediction model [J].
Lee, Rebecca ;
Griffiths, Sian Lowri ;
Gkoutos, Georgios V. ;
Wood, Stephen J. ;
Bravo-Merodio, Laura ;
Lalousis, Paris A. ;
Everard, Linda ;
Jones, Peter B. ;
Fowler, David ;
Hodegkins, Joanne ;
Amos, Tim ;
Freemantle, Nick ;
Singh, Swaran P. ;
Birchwood, Max ;
Upthegrove, Rachel .
SCHIZOPHRENIA RESEARCH, 2024, 274 :66-77