Literature DB >> 33733120

Analysis of Features Selected by a Deep Learning Model for Differential Treatment Selection in Depression.

Joseph Mehltretter1, Colleen Rollins2, David Benrimoh3,4,5,6, Robert Fratila6, Kelly Perlman5,6, Sonia Israel5,6, Marc Miresco6,7, Marina Wakid5, Gustavo Turecki3,5.   

Abstract

Background: Deep learning has utility in predicting differential antidepressant treatment response among patients with major depressive disorder, yet there remains a paucity of research describing how to interpret deep learning models in a clinically or etiologically meaningful way. In this paper, we describe methods for analyzing deep learning models of clinical and demographic psychiatric data, using our recent work on a deep learning model of STAR*D and CO-MED remission prediction.
Methods: Our deep learning analysis with STAR*D and CO-MED yielded four models that predicted response to the four treatments used across the two datasets. Here, we use classical statistics and simple data representations to improve interpretability of the features output by our deep learning model and provide finer grained understanding of their clinical and etiological significance. Specifically, we use representations derived from our model to yield features predicting both treatment non-response and differential treatment response to four standard antidepressants, and use linear regression and t-tests to address questions about the contribution of trauma, education, and somatic symptoms to our models.
Results: Traditional statistics were able to probe the input features of our deep learning models, reproducing results from previous research, while providing novel insights into depression causes and treatments. We found that specific features were predictive of treatment response, and were able to break these down by treatment and non-response categories; that specific trauma indices were differentially predictive of baseline depression severity; that somatic symptoms were significantly different between males and females, and that education and low income proved important psycho-social stressors associated with depression.
Conclusion: Traditional statistics can augment interpretation of deep learning models. Such interpretation can lend us new hypotheses about depression and contribute to building causal models of etiology and prognosis. We discuss dataset-specific effects and ideal clinical samples for machine learning analysis aimed at improving tools to assist in optimizing treatment.
Copyright © 2020 Mehltretter, Rollins, Benrimoh, Fratila, Perlman, Israel, Miresco, Wakid and Turecki.

Entities:  

Keywords:  deep learning; depression; features; interpretability; treatment

Year:  2020        PMID: 33733120      PMCID: PMC7861264          DOI: 10.3389/frai.2019.00031

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Front Artif Intell        ISSN: 2624-8212


  41 in total

1.  Opening the black box of neural networks: methods for interpreting neural network models in clinical applications.

Authors:  Zhongheng Zhang; Marcus W Beck; David A Winkler; Bin Huang; Wilbert Sibanda; Hemant Goyal
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2018-06

2.  Applications of machine learning algorithms to predict therapeutic outcomes in depression: A meta-analysis and systematic review.

Authors:  Yena Lee; Renee-Marie Ragguett; Rodrigo B Mansur; Justin J Boutilier; Joshua D Rosenblat; Alisson Trevizol; Elisa Brietzke; Kangguang Lin; Zihang Pan; Mehala Subramaniapillai; Timothy C Y Chan; Dominika Fus; Caroline Park; Natalie Musial; Hannah Zuckerman; Vincent Chin-Hung Chen; Roger Ho; Carola Rong; Roger S McIntyre
Journal:  J Affect Disord       Date:  2018-08-14       Impact factor: 4.839

3.  Cross-trial prediction of treatment outcome in depression: a machine learning approach.

Authors:  Adam Mourad Chekroud; Ryan Joseph Zotti; Zarrar Shehzad; Ralitza Gueorguieva; Marcia K Johnson; Madhukar H Trivedi; Tyrone D Cannon; John Harrison Krystal; Philip Robert Corlett
Journal:  Lancet Psychiatry       Date:  2016-01-21       Impact factor: 27.083

4.  Prognostic subgroups for citalopram response in the STAR*D trial.

Authors:  Ewgeni Jakubovski; Michael H Bloch
Journal:  J Clin Psychiatry       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 4.384

5.  International Study to Predict Optimized Treatment for Depression (iSPOT-D), a randomized clinical trial: rationale and protocol.

Authors:  Leanne M Williams; A John Rush; Stephen H Koslow; Stephen R Wisniewski; Nicholas J Cooper; Charles B Nemeroff; Alan F Schatzberg; Evian Gordon
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2011-01-05       Impact factor: 2.279

6.  Testing a machine-learning algorithm to predict the persistence and severity of major depressive disorder from baseline self-reports.

Authors:  R C Kessler; H M van Loo; K J Wardenaar; R M Bossarte; L A Brenner; T Cai; D D Ebert; I Hwang; J Li; P de Jonge; A A Nierenberg; M V Petukhova; A J Rosellini; N A Sampson; R A Schoevers; M A Wilcox; A M Zaslavsky
Journal:  Mol Psychiatry       Date:  2016-01-05       Impact factor: 15.992

7.  A direct test of the diathesis-stress model for depression.

Authors:  L Colodro-Conde; B Couvy-Duchesne; G Zhu; W L Coventry; E M Byrne; S Gordon; M J Wright; G W Montgomery; P A F Madden; S Ripke; L J Eaves; A C Heath; N R Wray; S E Medland; N G Martin
Journal:  Mol Psychiatry       Date:  2017-07-11       Impact factor: 15.992

8.  Prognostic significance of functional somatic symptoms in adolescence: a 15-year community-based follow-up study of adolescents with depression compared with healthy peers.

Authors:  Hannes Bohman; Ulf Jonsson; Aivar Päären; Lars von Knorring; Gunilla Olsson; Anne-Liis von Knorring
Journal:  BMC Psychiatry       Date:  2012-07-27       Impact factor: 3.630

Review 9.  Comorbidity between post-traumatic stress disorder and major depressive disorder: alternative explanations and treatment considerations.

Authors:  Janine D Flory; Rachel Yehuda
Journal:  Dialogues Clin Neurosci       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 5.986

10.  The interplay of stress and sleep impacts BDNF level.

Authors:  Maria Giese; Eva Unternaehrer; Serge Brand; Pasquale Calabrese; Edith Holsboer-Trachsler; Anne Eckert
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-10-16       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  2 in total

1.  Using a simulation centre to evaluate preliminary acceptability and impact of an artificial intelligence-powered clinical decision support system for depression treatment on the physician-patient interaction.

Authors:  David Benrimoh; Myriam Tanguay-Sela; Kelly Perlman; Sonia Israel; Joseph Mehltretter; Caitrin Armstrong; Robert Fratila; Sagar V Parikh; Jordan F Karp; Katherine Heller; Ipsit V Vahia; Daniel M Blumberger; Sherif Karama; Simone N Vigod; Gail Myhr; Ruben Martins; Colleen Rollins; Christina Popescu; Eryn Lundrigan; Emily Snook; Marina Wakid; Jérôme Williams; Ghassen Soufi; Tamara Perez; Jingla-Fri Tunteng; Katherine Rosenfeld; Marc Miresco; Gustavo Turecki; Liliana Gomez Cardona; Outi Linnaranta; Howard C Margolese
Journal:  BJPsych Open       Date:  2021-01-06

Review 2.  A Promising Approach to Optimizing Sequential Treatment Decisions for Depression: Markov Decision Process.

Authors:  Fang Li; Frederike Jörg; Xinyu Li; Talitha Feenstra
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2022-09-14       Impact factor: 4.558

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.