Povilas Karvelis, Colleen E Charlton, Shona G Allohverdi, Peter Bedford, Daniel J Hauke, Andreea O Diaconescu
{"title":"使用脑活动和行为数据预测重度抑郁症治疗反应的计算方法:系统回顾","authors":"Povilas Karvelis, Colleen E Charlton, Shona G Allohverdi, Peter Bedford, Daniel J Hauke, Andreea O Diaconescu","doi":"10.1162/netn_a_00233","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Major depressive disorder is a heterogeneous diagnostic category with multiple available treatments. With the goal of optimizing treatment selection, researchers are developing computational models that attempt to predict treatment response based on various pretreatment measures. In this paper, we review studies that use brain activity data to predict treatment response. Our aim is to highlight and clarify important methodological differences between various studies that relate to the incorporation of domain knowledge, specifically within two approaches delineated as data-driven and theory-driven. We argue that theory-driven generative modeling, which explicitly models information processing in the brain and thus can capture disease mechanisms, is a promising emerging approach that is only beginning to be utilized in treatment response prediction. The predictors extracted via such models could improve interpretability, which is critical for clinical decision-making. We also identify several methodological limitations across the reviewed studies and provide suggestions for addressing them. Namely, we consider problems with dichotomizing treatment outcomes, the importance of investigating more than one treatment in a given study for differential treatment response predictions, the need for a patient-centered approach for defining treatment outcomes, and finally, the use of internal and external validation methods for improving model generalizability.</p>","PeriodicalId":48520,"journal":{"name":"Network Neuroscience","volume":"6 1","pages":"1066-1103"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11117101/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Computational approaches to treatment response prediction in major depression using brain activity and behavioral data: A systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Povilas Karvelis, Colleen E Charlton, Shona G Allohverdi, Peter Bedford, Daniel J Hauke, Andreea O Diaconescu\",\"doi\":\"10.1162/netn_a_00233\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Major depressive disorder is a heterogeneous diagnostic category with multiple available treatments. With the goal of optimizing treatment selection, researchers are developing computational models that attempt to predict treatment response based on various pretreatment measures. In this paper, we review studies that use brain activity data to predict treatment response. Our aim is to highlight and clarify important methodological differences between various studies that relate to the incorporation of domain knowledge, specifically within two approaches delineated as data-driven and theory-driven. We argue that theory-driven generative modeling, which explicitly models information processing in the brain and thus can capture disease mechanisms, is a promising emerging approach that is only beginning to be utilized in treatment response prediction. The predictors extracted via such models could improve interpretability, which is critical for clinical decision-making. We also identify several methodological limitations across the reviewed studies and provide suggestions for addressing them. Namely, we consider problems with dichotomizing treatment outcomes, the importance of investigating more than one treatment in a given study for differential treatment response predictions, the need for a patient-centered approach for defining treatment outcomes, and finally, the use of internal and external validation methods for improving model generalizability.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48520,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Network Neuroscience\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"1066-1103\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11117101/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Network Neuroscience\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1162/netn_a_00233\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Network Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/netn_a_00233","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Computational approaches to treatment response prediction in major depression using brain activity and behavioral data: A systematic review.
Major depressive disorder is a heterogeneous diagnostic category with multiple available treatments. With the goal of optimizing treatment selection, researchers are developing computational models that attempt to predict treatment response based on various pretreatment measures. In this paper, we review studies that use brain activity data to predict treatment response. Our aim is to highlight and clarify important methodological differences between various studies that relate to the incorporation of domain knowledge, specifically within two approaches delineated as data-driven and theory-driven. We argue that theory-driven generative modeling, which explicitly models information processing in the brain and thus can capture disease mechanisms, is a promising emerging approach that is only beginning to be utilized in treatment response prediction. The predictors extracted via such models could improve interpretability, which is critical for clinical decision-making. We also identify several methodological limitations across the reviewed studies and provide suggestions for addressing them. Namely, we consider problems with dichotomizing treatment outcomes, the importance of investigating more than one treatment in a given study for differential treatment response predictions, the need for a patient-centered approach for defining treatment outcomes, and finally, the use of internal and external validation methods for improving model generalizability.