MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4408406293 · doi:10.1177/07067437251322399

Personalising Antidepressant Treatment for Unipolar Depression Combining Individual Choices, Risks and big Data: The PETRUSHKA Tool: Personnalisation du traitement antidépresseur de la dépression unipolaire associant choix individuels, risques et mégadonnées: l’outil PETRUSHKA

2025· article· en· W4408406293 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Edoardo G. Ostinelli, Matt Jaquiery, Qiang Liu, Rania Elgarf, Nyla Haque, Jennifer Potts, Zhenpeng Li, Orestis Efthimiou, Sarah Markham, Roger Ede, Laurence Wainwright, Karen Barros Parron Fernandes, Bianca Barros Parron Fernandes, Paulo Victor Carpaneze Dalaqua, Anneka Tomlinson, Katharine Smith, Caroline Zangani, Franco De Crescenzo, Marcos Liboni, Benoit H. Mulsant, Andrea Cipriani

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchWellcome Trust
KeywordsBespokeRandomized controlled trialDepression (economics)MedicinePsychiatryPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: We summarize the key steps to develop and assess an innovative online, evidence-based tool that supports shared decision-making in routine care to personalize antidepressant treatment in adults with depression. This PETRUSHKA tool is part of the PETRUSHKA trial (Personalize antidEpressant Treatment foR Unipolar depreSsion combining individual cHoices, risKs, and big datA). METHODS: The PETRUSHKA tool: (a) is based on prediction models, which use a combination of advanced analytics, i.e., traditional statistics, and machine learning methods; (b) utilizes electronic health records from primary care patients with depressive disorder in England and data from randomized controlled trials on antidepressants in depression, both at aggregate and individual patient level; (c) incorporates preferences from patients and clinicians (especially about adverse events); (d) generates a ranked list of personalized treatment recommendations to inform the discussion between clinicians and patients, and facilitates the final treatment choice. The PETRUSHKA tool is implemented as a web-based application, accessible from any computer, smartphone or tablet. RESULTS: We employed a bespoke algorithm to identify the best antidepressant for each individual patient, using patients' clinical and demographic characteristics and harnessing the power of innovations in digital technology, large datasets and machine learning. We established a dedicated group of patient representatives that were involved in the co-production of the tool, to maximize its impact in real-world clinical practice across the world. To test the tool, we designed an international multi-site, randomized trial (target sample: 504 participants), comparing the PETRUSHKA tool with usual care to personalize pharmacological treatment in patients with depressive disorder across Brazil, Canada and the UK. CONCLUSIONS: Using evidence-based patient decision aids has been recommended to support shared decision-making when quality is assured. Future studies in precision mental health should develop multimodal web tools, incorporating patients' preferences and their individual demographic, cultural, clinical, and genetic characteristics.Plain Language Summary TitleTailoring antidepressant treatment to individual patients with depression: the PETRUSHKA tool.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.093
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.093
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.112
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry→Same topicDigital Mental Health Interventions→French-language works237,207→