Prescriptive Predictors of Mindfulness Ecological Momentary Intervention for Social Anxiety Disorder: Machine Learning Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trial Data
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Shame and stigma often prevent individuals with social anxiety disorder (SAD) from seeking and attending costly and time-intensive psychotherapies, highlighting the importance of brief, low-cost, and scalable treatments. Creating prescriptive outcome prediction models is thus crucial for identifying which clients with SAD might gain the most from a unique scalable treatment option. Nevertheless, widely used classical regression methods might not optimally capture complex nonlinear associations and interactions. OBJECTIVE: Precision medicine approaches were thus harnessed to examine prescriptive predictors of optimization to a 14-day fully self-guided mindfulness ecological momentary intervention (MEMI) over a self-monitoring app (SM). METHODS: This study involved 191 participants who had probable SAD. Participants were randomly assigned to MEMI (n=96) or SM (n=95). They completed self-reports of symptoms, risk factors, treatment, and sociodemographics at baseline, posttreatment, and 1-month follow-up (1MFU). Machine learning (ML) models with 17 predictors of optimization to MEMI over SM, defined as a higher probability of SAD remission from MEMI at posttreatment and 1MFU, were evaluated. The Social Phobia Diagnostic Questionnaire, structurally equivalent to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual SAD criteria, was used to define remission. These ML models included random forest and support vector machines (radial basis function kernel) and 10-fold nested cross-validation that separated model training, minimal tuning in inner folds, and model testing in outer folds. RESULTS: ML models outperformed logistic regression. The multivariable ML models using the 10 most important predictors achieved good performance, with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AU-ROC) values ranging from .71 to .72 at posttreatment and 1MFU. These prerandomization and early-stage prescriptive predictors consistently identified which participants had the highest probability of optimization of MEMI over SM after 14 days and 6 weeks from baseline. Significant predictors included 4 strengths (higher trait mindfulness, lower SAD severity, presence of university education, no current psychotropic medication use), 2 weaknesses (higher generalized anxiety severity and clinician-diagnosed depression or anxiety disorder), and 1 sociodemographic variable (Chinese ethnicity). Emotion dysregulation and current psychotherapy predicted remission with inconsistent signs across time points. CONCLUSIONS: The AU-ROC values indicated moderately meaningful effect sizes in identifying prescriptive predictors within multivariable models for clients with SAD. Focusing on the identified notable client strengths, weaknesses, and Chinese ethnicity may enhance our ability to predict future responses to scalable treatments. Estimating the likelihood of SAD remission with a "prescriptive predictor calculator" for each client may help clinicians and policymakers allocate scarce treatment resources effectively. Clients with high remission probability may benefit from receiving the MEMI as a vigilant waitlist strategy before intensive therapist-led psychotherapy. These efforts may aid in creating actionable treatment selection tools to optimize care for clients with SAD in routine health care settings that use stratified care principles. TRIAL REGISTRATION: OSF Registries 10.17605/OSF.IO/M3KXZ; https://osf.io/m3kxz.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,136 | 0,152 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,007 | 0,008 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».