Search

Background This study aimed to develop, validate and compare the performance of models predicting post-treatment outcomes for depressed adults based on pre-treatment data. Methods Individual patient data from all six eligible randomised controlled trials were used to develop (k = 3, n = 1722) and test (k = 3, n = 918) nine models. Predictors included depressive and anxiety symptoms, social support, life events and alcohol use. Weighted sum scores were developed using coefficient weights derived from network centrality statistics (models 1–3) and factor loadings from a confirmatory factor analysis (model 4). Unweighted sum score models were tested using elastic net regularised (ENR) and ordinary least squares (OLS) regression (models 5 and 6). Individual items were then included in ENR and OLS (models 7 and 8). All models were compared to one another and to a null model (mean post-baseline Beck Depression Inventory Second Edition (BDI-II) score in the training data: model 9). Primary outcome: BDI-II scores at 3–4 months. Results Models 1–7 all outperformed the null model and model 8. Model performance was very similar across models 1–6, meaning that differential weights applied to the baseline sum scores had little impact. Conclusions Any of the modelling techniques (models 1–7) could be used to inform prognostic predictions for depressed adults with differences in the proportions of patients reaching remission based on the predicted severity of depressive symptoms post-treatment. However, the majority of variance in prognosis remained unexplained. It may be necessary to include a broader range of biopsychosocial variables to better adjudicate between competing models, and to derive models with greater clinical utility for treatment-seeking adults with depression.

Background Network analyses on psychopathological data focus on the network structure and its derivatives such as node centrality. One conclusion one can draw from centrality measures is that the node with the highest centrality is likely to be the node that is determined most by its neighboring nodes. However, centrality is a relative measure: knowing that a node is highly central gives no information about the extent to which it is determined by its neighbors. Here we provide an absolute measure of determination (or controllability) of a node - its predictability. We introduce predictability, estimate the predictability of all nodes in 18 prior empirical network papers on psychopathology, and statistically relate it to centrality. Methods We carried out a literature review and collected 25 datasets from 18 published papers in the field (several mood and anxiety disorders, substance abuse, psychosis, autism, and transdiagnostic data). We fit state-of-the-art net- work models to all datasets, and computed the predictability of all nodes. Results Predictability was unrelated to sample size, moderately high in most symptom networks, and differed considerable both within and between datasets. Predictability was higher in community than clinical samples, highest for mood and anxiety disorders, and lowest for psychosis. Conclusions Predictability is an important additional characterization of symptom networks because it gives an absolute measure of the controllability of each node. It allows conclusions about how self-determined a symptom network is, and may help to inform intervention strategies. Limitations of predictability along with future directions are discussed., 24 pages, 1 table, 4 figures

BackgroundFor diagnostic purposes, the nine symptoms that compose the DSM-5 criteria for major depressive disorder (MDD) are assumed to be interchangeable indicators of one underlying disorder, implying that they should all have similar risk factors. The present study investigates this hypothesis, using a population cohort that shifts from low to elevated depression levels.MethodWe assessed the nine DSM-5 MDD criterion symptoms (using the Patient Health Questionnaire; PHQ-9) and seven depression risk factors (personal and family MDD history, sex, childhood stress, neuroticism, work hours, and stressful life events) in a longitudinal study of medical interns prior to and throughout internship (n = 1289). We tested whether risk factors varied across symptoms, and whether a latent disease model could account for heterogeneity between symptoms.ResultsAll MDD symptoms increased significantly during residency training. Four risk factors predicted increases in unique subsets of PHQ-9 symptoms over time (depression history, childhood stress, sex, and stressful life events), whereas neuroticism and work hours predicted increases in all symptoms, albeit to varying magnitudes. MDD family history did not predict increases in any symptom. The strong heterogeneity of associations persisted after controlling for a latent depression factor.ConclusionsThe influence of risk factors varies substantially across DSM depression criterion symptoms. As symptoms are etiologically heterogeneous, considering individual symptoms in addition to depression diagnosis might offer important insights obfuscated by symptom sum scores.