Literature DB >> 24588404

Data mining in psychological treatment research: a primer on classification and regression trees.

Matthew W King1, Patricia A Resick1.   

Abstract

Data mining of treatment study results can reveal unforeseen but critical insights, such as who receives the most benefit from treatment and under what circumstances. The usefulness and legitimacy of exploratory data analysis have received relatively little recognition, however, and analytic methods well suited to the task are not widely known in psychology. With roots in computer science and statistics, statistical learning approaches offer a credible option: These methods take a more inductive approach to building a model than is done in traditional regression, allowing the data greater role in suggesting the correct relationships between variables rather than imposing them a priori. Classification and regression trees are presented as a powerful, flexible exemplar of statistical learning methods. Trees allow researchers to efficiently identify useful predictors of an outcome and discover interactions between predictors without the need to anticipate and specify these in advance, making them ideal for revealing patterns that inform hypotheses about treatment effects. Trees can also provide a predictive model for forecasting outcomes as an aid to clinical decision making. This primer describes how tree models are constructed, how the results are interpreted and evaluated, and how trees overcome some of the complexities of traditional regression. Examples are drawn from randomized clinical trial data and highlight some interpretations of particular interest to treatment researchers. The limitations of tree models are discussed, and suggestions for further reading and choices in software are offered. PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved.

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24588404     DOI: 10.1037/a0035886

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Consult Clin Psychol        ISSN: 0022-006X


  14 in total

1.  Six Month Abstinence Heterogeneity in the Best Quit Study.

Authors:  Harold S Javitz; Terry M Bush; Jennifer C Lovejoy; Alula J Torres; Tallie Wetzel; Ken P Wassum; Marcia M Tan; Nabil Alshurafa; Bonnie Spring
Journal:  Ann Behav Med       Date:  2019-11-09

Review 2.  Annual Research Review: Building a science of personalized intervention for youth mental health.

Authors:  Mei Yi Ng; John R Weisz
Journal:  J Child Psychol Psychiatry       Date:  2015-10-15       Impact factor: 8.982

3.  A Comparison of Methods for Uncovering Sample Heterogeneity: Structural Equation Model Trees and Finite Mixture Models.

Authors:  Ross Jacobucci; Kevin J Grimm; John J McArdle
Journal:  Struct Equ Modeling       Date:  2016-12-07       Impact factor: 6.125

4.  Efficacy of Guided iCBT for Depression and Mediation of Change by Cognitive Skill Acquisition.

Authors:  Nicholas R Forand; Jeffrey G Barnett; Daniel R Strunk; Mohammed U Hindiyeh; Jason E Feinberg; John R Keefe
Journal:  Behav Ther       Date:  2017-05-01

5.  Patterns of Caregiver Factors Predicting Participation in Trauma-Focused Cognitive Behavioral Therapy.

Authors:  Betty S Lai; Ashwini Tiwari; Shannon Self-Brown; Peter Cronholm; Kelly Kinnish
Journal:  J Child Adolesc Trauma       Date:  2017-07-15

6.  Predictors of outcome for telephone and face-to-face administered cognitive behavioral therapy for depression.

Authors:  C Stiles-Shields; M E Corden; M J Kwasny; S M Schueller; D C Mohr
Journal:  Psychol Med       Date:  2015-06-16       Impact factor: 7.723

7.  Development and validation of empirically derived frequency criteria for NSSI disorder using exploratory data mining.

Authors:  Brooke A Ammerman; Ross Jacobucci; Evan M Kleiman; Jennifer J Muehlenkamp; Michael S McCloskey
Journal:  Psychol Assess       Date:  2016-05-12

8.  Emerging approaches to multiple chronic condition assessment.

Authors:  Jerry Suls; Marcel E Salive; Siran M Koroukian; Farrokh Alemi; Jeffrey H Silber; Gabi Kastenmüller; Carrie N Klabunde
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2022-06-14       Impact factor: 7.538

9.  Machine learning v. traditional regression models predicting treatment outcomes for binge-eating disorder from a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Lauren N Forrest; Valentina Ivezaj; Carlos M Grilo
Journal:  Psychol Med       Date:  2021-11-25       Impact factor: 10.592

10.  Qualitative Treatment-Subgroup Interactions in a Randomized Clinical Trial of Treatments for Adolescents with ADHD: Exploring What Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment Works for Whom.

Authors:  Bianca E Boyer; Lisa L Doove; Hilde M Geurts; Pier J M Prins; Iven Van Mechelen; Saskia Van der Oord
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-03-15       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.