Who Benefited Most from the Internet-Based Conversational Engagement RCT (I-CONECT)? Application of the Personalized Medicine Approach to a Behavioral Intervention Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Many Alzheimer's Disease (AD) clinical trials have failed to demonstrate treatment efficacy on cognition. It is conceivable that a complex disease like AD may not have the same treatment effect due to many heterogeneities of disease processes and individual traits. OBJECTIVES: We employed an individual-level treatment response (ITR) approach to determine the characteristics of treatment responders and estimated time saved in cognitive decline using the Internet-based Conversational Engagement Clinical Trial (I-CONECT) behavioral intervention study as a model. DESIGN AND SETTING: I-CONECT is a multi-site, single-blind, randomized controlled trial aimed to improve cognitive functions through frequent conversational interactions via internet/webcam. The experimental group engaged in video chats with study staff 4 times/week for 6 months; the control group received weekly 10-minute check-in phone calls. PARTICIPANTS: Out of 186 randomized participants, current study used 139 participants with complete information on both baseline and 6-month follow-up (73 with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), 66 with normal cognition; 64 in the experimental group, and 75 in the control group). MEASUREMENTS: ITR scores were generated for the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) (global cognition, primary outcome) and Category Fluency Animals (CFA) (semantic fluency, secondary outcome) that showed significant efficacy in the trial. ITR scores were generated through 300 iterations of 3-fold cross-validated random forest models. The average treatment difference (ATD) curve and the area between the curves (ABC) were estimated to measure the heterogeneity of treatment responses. Responder traits were identified using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) and decision tree models. The time saved in cognitive decline was explored to gauge clinical meaningfulness. RESULTS: ABC statistics showed substantial heterogeneity in treatment response with MoCA but modest heterogeneity in treatment response with CFA. Age, cognitive status, time spent with family and friends, education, and personality were important characteristics that influenced treatment responses. Intervention group participants in the upper 30% of ITR scores demonstrated potential delays of 3 months in semantic fluency (CFA) and 6 months in global cognition (MoCA), assuming a 5-fold faster natural cognitive decline compared to the control group during the post-treatment period. CONCLUSIONS: ITR-based analyses are valuable in profiling treatment responders for features that can inform future trial design and clinical practice. Reliably measuring time saved in cognitive decline is an area of ongoing research to gain insight into the clinical meaningfulness of treatment.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».