{"title":"正念生态瞬间干预与自我监控应用程序相比,哪种方法更适合广泛性焦虑症患者?开发多变量机器学习预测模型","authors":"Nur Hani Zainal , Michelle G. Newman","doi":"10.1016/j.janxdis.2024.102825","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span><span>Precision medicine methods (machine learning; ML) can identify which clients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) benefit from </span>mindfulness<span> ecological momentary intervention (MEMI) vs. self-monitoring app (SM). We used randomized controlled trial data of MEMI vs. SM for GAD (</span></span><em>N</em><span> = 110) and tested three ML models to predict one-month follow-up reliable improvement in GAD severity, perseverative cognitions (PC), trait mindfulness<span><span> (TM), and executive function (EF). Eleven baseline predictors were tested regarding differential reliable change from MEMI vs. SM (age, sex, race, EF errors, inhibitory dyscontrol, set-shifting deficits, verbal fluency, working memory, GAD severity, TM, PC). The final top five prescriptive predictor models of all outcomes performed well (AUC = .752 .886). The following variables predicted better outcome from MEMI vs. SM: Higher GAD severity predicted more GAD improvement but less EF improvement. Elevated PC, inhibitory dyscontrol, and verbal </span>dysfluency predicted better improvement in most outcomes. Greater set-shifting and TM predicted stronger improvements in GAD symptoms and TM. Older age predicted more alleviation of GAD and PC symptoms. Women exhibited more enhancements in trait mindfulness and EF than men. White individuals benefitted more than non-White. PC, TM, EF, and sociodemographic data might help predictive models optimize intervention selection for GAD.</span></span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":48390,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anxiety Disorders","volume":"102 ","pages":"Article 102825"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Which client with generalized anxiety disorder benefits from a mindfulness ecological momentary intervention versus a self-monitoring app? Developing a multivariable machine learning predictive model\",\"authors\":\"Nur Hani Zainal , Michelle G. Newman\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.janxdis.2024.102825\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p><span><span>Precision medicine methods (machine learning; ML) can identify which clients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) benefit from </span>mindfulness<span> ecological momentary intervention (MEMI) vs. self-monitoring app (SM). We used randomized controlled trial data of MEMI vs. SM for GAD (</span></span><em>N</em><span> = 110) and tested three ML models to predict one-month follow-up reliable improvement in GAD severity, perseverative cognitions (PC), trait mindfulness<span><span> (TM), and executive function (EF). Eleven baseline predictors were tested regarding differential reliable change from MEMI vs. SM (age, sex, race, EF errors, inhibitory dyscontrol, set-shifting deficits, verbal fluency, working memory, GAD severity, TM, PC). The final top five prescriptive predictor models of all outcomes performed well (AUC = .752 .886). The following variables predicted better outcome from MEMI vs. SM: Higher GAD severity predicted more GAD improvement but less EF improvement. Elevated PC, inhibitory dyscontrol, and verbal </span>dysfluency predicted better improvement in most outcomes. Greater set-shifting and TM predicted stronger improvements in GAD symptoms and TM. Older age predicted more alleviation of GAD and PC symptoms. Women exhibited more enhancements in trait mindfulness and EF than men. White individuals benefitted more than non-White. PC, TM, EF, and sociodemographic data might help predictive models optimize intervention selection for GAD.</span></span></p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48390,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Anxiety Disorders\",\"volume\":\"102 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102825\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Anxiety Disorders\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S088761852400001X\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Anxiety Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S088761852400001X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
精准医疗方法(机器学习;ML)可以确定哪些广泛性焦虑症(GAD)患者可以从正念生态瞬间干预(MEMI)与自我监控应用程序(SM)中获益。我们使用了针对 GAD 的正念生态瞬间干预(MEMI)与自我监控应用程序(SM)的随机对照试验数据(N = 110),并测试了三个 ML 模型,以预测 GAD 严重程度、锲而不舍的认知(PC)、特质正念(TM)和执行功能(EF)的一个月随访可靠改善情况。针对 MEMI 与 SM 的不同可靠变化,测试了 11 个基线预测因子(年龄、性别、种族、EF 错误、抑制性控制障碍、集合转换缺陷、语言流畅性、工作记忆、GAD 严重程度、TM、PC)。所有结果的最终前五位规定性预测模型均表现良好(AUC = 0.752-0.886)。以下变量可预测 MEMI 与 SM 相比的更好结果:GAD 严重程度越高,GAD 改善越大,但 EF 改善越小。PC升高、抑制性控制障碍和言语流畅性障碍预示着大多数结果会有更好的改善。更多的集合转移和 TM 预测 GAD 症状和 TM 会有更大的改善。年龄越大,GAD 和 PC 症状的缓解越明显。与男性相比,女性在特质正念和EF方面表现出更大的改善。白种人比非白种人受益更多。PC、TM、EF和社会人口学数据可帮助预测模型优化对GAD的干预选择。
Which client with generalized anxiety disorder benefits from a mindfulness ecological momentary intervention versus a self-monitoring app? Developing a multivariable machine learning predictive model
Precision medicine methods (machine learning; ML) can identify which clients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) benefit from mindfulness ecological momentary intervention (MEMI) vs. self-monitoring app (SM). We used randomized controlled trial data of MEMI vs. SM for GAD (N = 110) and tested three ML models to predict one-month follow-up reliable improvement in GAD severity, perseverative cognitions (PC), trait mindfulness (TM), and executive function (EF). Eleven baseline predictors were tested regarding differential reliable change from MEMI vs. SM (age, sex, race, EF errors, inhibitory dyscontrol, set-shifting deficits, verbal fluency, working memory, GAD severity, TM, PC). The final top five prescriptive predictor models of all outcomes performed well (AUC = .752 .886). The following variables predicted better outcome from MEMI vs. SM: Higher GAD severity predicted more GAD improvement but less EF improvement. Elevated PC, inhibitory dyscontrol, and verbal dysfluency predicted better improvement in most outcomes. Greater set-shifting and TM predicted stronger improvements in GAD symptoms and TM. Older age predicted more alleviation of GAD and PC symptoms. Women exhibited more enhancements in trait mindfulness and EF than men. White individuals benefitted more than non-White. PC, TM, EF, and sociodemographic data might help predictive models optimize intervention selection for GAD.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Anxiety Disorders is an interdisciplinary journal that publishes research papers on all aspects of anxiety disorders for individuals of all age groups, including children, adolescents, adults, and the elderly. Manuscripts that focus on disorders previously classified as anxiety disorders such as obsessive-compulsive disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder, as well as the new category of illness anxiety disorder, are also within the scope of the journal. The research areas of focus include traditional, behavioral, cognitive, and biological assessment; diagnosis and classification; psychosocial and psychopharmacological treatment; genetics; epidemiology; and prevention. The journal welcomes theoretical and review articles that significantly contribute to current knowledge in the field. It is abstracted and indexed in various databases such as Elsevier, BIOBASE, PubMed/Medline, PsycINFO, BIOSIS Citation Index, BRS Data, Current Contents - Social & Behavioral Sciences, Pascal Francis, Scopus, and Google Scholar.