Anthony J Rosellini1, Murray B Stein2,3, David M Benedek4, Paul D Bliese5, Wai Tat Chiu6, Irving Hwang6, John Monahan7, Matthew K Nock8, Nancy A Sampson6, Amy E Street9,10, Alan M Zaslavsky6, Robert J Ursano4, Ronald C Kessler6. 1. Center for Anxiety and Related Disorders, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts. 2. Departments of Psychiatry and Family Medicine and Public Health, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California. 3. VA San Diego Healthcare System, San Diego, California. 4. Center for the Study of Traumatic Stress, Department of Psychiatry, Uniformed Services University School of Medicine, Bethesda, Maryland. 5. Darla Moore School of Business, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina. 6. Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 7. School of Law, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia. 8. Department of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts. 9. National Center for PTSD, VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, Massachusetts. 10. Department of Psychiatry, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Preventing suicides, mental disorders, and noncombat-related interpersonal violence during deployment are priorities of the US Army. We used predeployment survey and administrative data to develop actuarial models to identify soldiers at high risk of these outcomes during combat deployment. METHODS: The models were developed in the Army Study to Assess Risk and Resilience in Servicemembers (Army STARRS) Pre-Post Deployment Study, a panel study of soldiers deployed to Afghanistan in 2012-2013. Soldiers completed self-administered questionnaires before deployment and one (T1), three (T2), and nine months (T3) after deployment, and consented to administrative data linkage. Seven during-deployment outcomes were operationalized using the postdeployment surveys. Two overlapping samples were used because some outcomes were assessed at T1 (n = 7,048) and others at T2-T3 (n = 7,081). Ensemble machine learning was used to develop a model for each outcome from 273 predeployment predictors, which were compared to simple logistic regression models. RESULTS: The relative improvement in area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) obtained by machine learning compared to the logistic models ranged from 1.11 (major depression) to 1.83 (suicidality).The best-performing machine learning models were for major depression (AUC = 0.88), suicidality (0.86), and generalized anxiety disorder (0.85). Roughly 40% of these outcomes occurred among the 5% of soldiers with highest predicted risk. CONCLUSIONS: Actuarial models could be used to identify high risk soldiers either for exclusion from deployment or preventive interventions. However, the ultimate value of this approach depends on the associated costs, competing risks (e.g. stigma), and the effectiveness to-be-determined interventions.
BACKGROUND: Preventing suicides, mental disorders, and noncombat-related interpersonal violence during deployment are priorities of the US Army. We used predeployment survey and administrative data to develop actuarial models to identify soldiers at high risk of these outcomes during combat deployment. METHODS: The models were developed in the Army Study to Assess Risk and Resilience in Servicemembers (Army STARRS) Pre-Post Deployment Study, a panel study of soldiers deployed to Afghanistan in 2012-2013. Soldiers completed self-administered questionnaires before deployment and one (T1), three (T2), and nine months (T3) after deployment, and consented to administrative data linkage. Seven during-deployment outcomes were operationalized using the postdeployment surveys. Two overlapping samples were used because some outcomes were assessed at T1 (n = 7,048) and others at T2-T3 (n = 7,081). Ensemble machine learning was used to develop a model for each outcome from 273 predeployment predictors, which were compared to simple logistic regression models. RESULTS: The relative improvement in area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) obtained by machine learning compared to the logistic models ranged from 1.11 (major depression) to 1.83 (suicidality).The best-performing machine learning models were for major depression (AUC = 0.88), suicidality (0.86), and generalized anxiety disorder (0.85). Roughly 40% of these outcomes occurred among the 5% of soldiers with highest predicted risk. CONCLUSIONS: Actuarial models could be used to identify high risk soldiers either for exclusion from deployment or preventive interventions. However, the ultimate value of this approach depends on the associated costs, competing risks (e.g. stigma), and the effectiveness to-be-determined interventions.
Authors: Christopher H Warner; George N Appenzeller; Jessica R Parker; Carolynn M Warner; Charles W Hoge Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2011-01-18 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Kelly Posner; Gregory K Brown; Barbara Stanley; David A Brent; Kseniya V Yershova; Maria A Oquendo; Glenn W Currier; Glenn A Melvin; Laurence Greenhill; Sa Shen; J John Mann Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: J David Cassidy; Linda J Carroll; Paul M Peloso; Jörgen Borg; Hans von Holst; Lena Holm; Jess Kraus; Victor G Coronado Journal: J Rehabil Med Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 2.912
Authors: Hoda Elmasry; Michael R Boivin; Xiaoshu Feng; Elizabeth R Packnett; David N Cowan Journal: J Head Trauma Rehabil Date: 2017 Jan/Feb Impact factor: 2.710
Authors: Matthew K Nock; Charlene A Deming; Carol S Fullerton; Stephen E Gilman; Matthew Goldenberg; Ronald C Kessler; James E McCarroll; Katie A McLaughlin; Christopher Peterson; Michael Schoenbaum; Barbara Stanley; Robert J Ursano Journal: Psychiatry Date: 2013 Impact factor: 2.458
Authors: R C Kessler; M B Stein; M V Petukhova; P Bliese; R M Bossarte; E J Bromet; C S Fullerton; S E Gilman; C Ivany; L Lewandowski-Romps; A Millikan Bell; J A Naifeh; M K Nock; B Y Reis; A J Rosellini; N A Sampson; A M Zaslavsky; R J Ursano Journal: Mol Psychiatry Date: 2016-07-19 Impact factor: 15.992
Authors: Murray B Stein; Karmel W Choi; Sonia Jain; Laura Campbell-Sills; Chia-Yen Chen; Joel Gelernter; Feng He; Steven G Heeringa; Adam X Maihofer; Caroline Nievergelt; Matthew K Nock; Stephan Ripke; Xiaoying Sun; Ronald C Kessler; Jordan W Smoller; Robert J Ursano Journal: Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet Date: 2019-05-13 Impact factor: 3.568
Authors: Laura Campbell-Sills; Jason D Kautz; Karmel W Choi; James A Naifeh; Pablo A Aliaga; Sonia Jain; Xiaoying Sun; Ronald C Kessler; Murray B Stein; Robert J Ursano; Paul D Bliese Journal: Psychol Med Date: 2021-11-22 Impact factor: 7.723
Authors: Kelly L Zuromski; Samantha L Bernecker; Carol Chu; Chelsey R Wilks; Peter M Gutierrez; Thomas E Joiner; Howard Liu; James A Naifeh; Matthew K Nock; Nancy A Sampson; Alan M Zaslavsky; Murray B Stein; Robert J Ursano; Ronald C Kessler Journal: J Psychiatr Res Date: 2019-12-07 Impact factor: 4.791