Predicting relapse or recurrence of depression: systematic review of prognostic models.

Andrew S Moriarty, Nicholas Meader, Kym I E Snell, Richard D Riley, Lewis W Paton, Sarah Dawson, Jessica Hendon, Carolyn A Chew-Graham, Simon Gilbody, Rachel Churchill, Robert S Phillips, Shehzad Ali, Dean McMillan
{"title":"Predicting relapse or recurrence of depression: systematic review of prognostic models.","authors":"Andrew S Moriarty, Nicholas Meader, Kym I E Snell, Richard D Riley, Lewis W Paton, Sarah Dawson, Jessica Hendon, Carolyn A Chew-Graham, Simon Gilbody, Rachel Churchill, Robert S Phillips, Shehzad Ali, Dean McMillan","doi":"10.1192/bjp.2021.218","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Relapse and recurrence of depression are common, contributing to the overall burden of depression globally. Accurate prediction of relapse or recurrence while patients are well would allow the identification of high-risk individuals and may effectively guide the allocation of interventions to prevent relapse and recurrence.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To review prognostic models developed to predict the risk of relapse, recurrence, sustained remission, or recovery in adults with remitted major depressive disorder.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We searched the Cochrane Library (current issue); Ovid MEDLINE (1946 onwards); Ovid Embase (1980 onwards); Ovid PsycINFO (1806 onwards); and Web of Science (1900 onwards) up to May 2021. We included development and external validation studies of multivariable prognostic models. We assessed risk of bias of included studies using the Prediction model risk of bias assessment tool (PROBAST).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 12 eligible prognostic model studies (11 unique prognostic models): 8 model development-only studies, 3 model development and external validation studies and 1 external validation-only study. Multiple estimates of performance measures were not available and meta-analysis was therefore not necessary. Eleven out of the 12 included studies were assessed as being at high overall risk of bias and none examined clinical utility.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Due to high risk of bias of the included studies, poor predictive performance and limited external validation of the models identified, presently available clinical prediction models for relapse and recurrence of depression are not yet sufficiently developed for deploying in clinical settings. There is a need for improved prognosis research in this clinical area and future studies should conform to best practice methodological and reporting guidelines.</p>","PeriodicalId":520791,"journal":{"name":"The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science","volume":" ","pages":"448-458"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.2021.218","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Relapse and recurrence of depression are common, contributing to the overall burden of depression globally. Accurate prediction of relapse or recurrence while patients are well would allow the identification of high-risk individuals and may effectively guide the allocation of interventions to prevent relapse and recurrence.

Aims: To review prognostic models developed to predict the risk of relapse, recurrence, sustained remission, or recovery in adults with remitted major depressive disorder.

Method: We searched the Cochrane Library (current issue); Ovid MEDLINE (1946 onwards); Ovid Embase (1980 onwards); Ovid PsycINFO (1806 onwards); and Web of Science (1900 onwards) up to May 2021. We included development and external validation studies of multivariable prognostic models. We assessed risk of bias of included studies using the Prediction model risk of bias assessment tool (PROBAST).

Results: We identified 12 eligible prognostic model studies (11 unique prognostic models): 8 model development-only studies, 3 model development and external validation studies and 1 external validation-only study. Multiple estimates of performance measures were not available and meta-analysis was therefore not necessary. Eleven out of the 12 included studies were assessed as being at high overall risk of bias and none examined clinical utility.

Conclusions: Due to high risk of bias of the included studies, poor predictive performance and limited external validation of the models identified, presently available clinical prediction models for relapse and recurrence of depression are not yet sufficiently developed for deploying in clinical settings. There is a need for improved prognosis research in this clinical area and future studies should conform to best practice methodological and reporting guidelines.

预测抑郁症复发或复发:预后模型的系统回顾。
背景:抑郁症的复发和复发是常见的,造成了全球抑郁症的总体负担。在患者健康时准确预测复发或复发,可以识别高危人群,并可以有效指导干预措施的分配,以防止复发和复发。目的:回顾用于预测成人重度抑郁症缓解患者复发、复发、持续缓解或恢复风险的预后模型。方法:检索Cochrane图书馆(最新一期);奥维德MEDLINE(1946年起);奥维德·埃姆贝斯(1980年以后);Ovid PsycINFO(1806年起);和Web of Science(1900年起),截止到2021年5月。我们纳入了多变量预后模型的开发和外部验证研究。我们使用预测模型偏倚风险评估工具(PROBAST)评估纳入研究的偏倚风险。结果:我们确定了12个符合条件的预后模型研究(11个独特的预后模型):8个模型开发研究,3个模型开发和外部验证研究,1个外部验证研究。由于没有对绩效指标的多重估计,因此没有必要进行荟萃分析。纳入的12项研究中有11项被评估为总体偏倚风险高,没有一项研究检查了临床效用。结论:由于纳入研究的偏倚风险高,预测性能差,所确定的模型的外部验证有限,目前可用的抑郁症复发和复发的临床预测模型尚未充分开发,无法在临床环境中部署。在这一临床领域需要改进预后研究,未来的研究应符合最佳实践方法和报告指南。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信