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] Predicting Neurological Deterioration after Moderate Traumatic Brain Injury: Development and Validation of a Prediction Model Based on Data Collected on Admission
    Chen, Mingsheng
    Li, Zhihong
    Yan, Zhifeng
    Ge, Shunnan
    Zhang, Yongbing
    Yang, Haigui
    Zhao, Lanfu
    Liu, Lingyu
    Zhang, Xingye
    Cai, Yaning
    Qu, Yan
    JOURNAL OF NEUROTRAUMA, 2022, 39 (5-6) : 371 - 378
  • [42] Development and validation of common data model-based fracture prediction model using machine learning algorithm
    Kong, Sung Hye
    Kim, Sihyeon
    Kim, Yisak
    Kim, Jung Hee
    Kim, Kwangsoo
    Shin, Chan Soo
    OSTEOPOROSIS INTERNATIONAL, 2023, 34 (08) : 1437 - 1451
  • [43] Development and validation of common data model-based fracture prediction model using machine learning algorithm
    Sung Hye Kong
    Sihyeon Kim
    Yisak Kim
    Jung Hee Kim
    Kwangsoo Kim
    Chan Soo Shin
    Osteoporosis International, 2023, 34 : 1437 - 1451
  • [44] Glucocorticoid treatment and clinical outcomes in patients with polymyalgia rheumatica: A cohort study using routinely collected health data
    Tanaka, Yoshiya
    Tanaka, Shinichi
    Fukasawa, Toshiki
    Inokuchi, Shoichiro
    Uenaka, Hidetoshi
    Kimura, Takeshi
    Takahashi, Toshiya
    Kato, Naoto
    JOINT BONE SPINE, 2024, 91 (03)
  • [45] PREDICT, Prediction of Delirium in ICU Patients: development and validation of a prediction model
    M Vanden Boogaard
    P Pickkers
    H Vander Hoeven
    R Donders
    T Van Achterberg
    L Schoonhoven
    Critical Care, 14 (Suppl 1):
  • [46] Development and validation of an epidemiologic case definition of epilepsy for use with routinely collected Australian health data
    Tan, Michael
    Wilson, Ian
    Braganza, Vanessa
    Ignatiadis, Sophia
    Boston, Ray
    Sundararajan, Vijaya
    Cook, Mark J.
    D'Souza, Wendy J.
    EPILEPSY & BEHAVIOR, 2015, 51 : 65 - 72
  • [47] Personalised Outcomes Forecasts of Supervised Exercise Therapy in Intermittent Claudication: An Application of Neighbours Based Prediction Methods with Routinely Collected Clinical Data
    Sinnige, Anneroos
    Kittelson, Andrew
    Van der Wees, Philip J.
    Teijink, Joep A. W.
    Hoogeboom, Thomas J.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF VASCULAR AND ENDOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2022, 63 (04) : 594 - 601
  • [48] DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF A PREDICTION MODEL FOR HAND OSTEOARTHRITIS
    Johnsen, M. B.
    Magnusson, K.
    Borte, S.
    Gabrielsen, M. E.
    Winsvold, B. S.
    Skogholt, A.
    Thomas, L.
    Storheim, K.
    Hveem, K.
    Zwart, J. -A.
    OSTEOARTHRITIS AND CARTILAGE, 2020, 28 : S425 - S426
  • [49] Development and Validation of a Bronchoscopic Yield Prediction Model
    Fox, A.
    Silvestri, G. A.
    Nietert, P. J.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF RESPIRATORY AND CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 2020, 201
  • [50] Validation of safety outcomes in routinely collected data: Lessons learned from a multinational postapproval safety study
    Arena, Patrick J.
    Huang, Kui
    Lofling, Lukas
    Bahmanyar, Shahram
    Mo, Jingping
    Schachterle, Stephen E.
    Nunes, Anthony P.
    Smits, Elisabeth
    Juuti, Rosa
    Hoti, Fabian
    Korhonen, Pasi
    Adelborg, Kasper
    Sundboll, Jens
    Rasmussen, Torben Riis
    Lokke, Anders
    Ehrenstein, Vera
    PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY AND DRUG SAFETY, 2023, 32 (05) : 592 - 596