尼古丁替代疗法可以个性化吗?统计学习分析

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment Pub Date : 2022-10-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jsat.2022.108847
Scott Veldhuizen , Laurie Zawertailo , Sarwar Hussain , Sabrina Voci , Peter Selby
{"title":"尼古丁替代疗法可以个性化吗?统计学习分析","authors":"Scott Veldhuizen ,&nbsp;Laurie Zawertailo ,&nbsp;Sarwar Hussain ,&nbsp;Sabrina Voci ,&nbsp;Peter Selby","doi":"10.1016/j.jsat.2022.108847","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Technology has made automated care personalization practical, but useful personalization requires information about systematic differences between individuals in the effectiveness of different interventions. Here, we used observational data to search for differences in smoking cessation<span><span> treatment outcomes associated with interactions between participant characteristics and different types and doses of </span>nicotine replacement therapy (NRT).</span></p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p><span>We analyzed 33,077 enrollments in a large primary care </span>smoking cessation program in Ontario, Canada. We considered 10 types and combinations of NRT, as well as the provided daily dose of nicotine. We used ridge regression to fit one main effects model and one model including all possible interactions between these measures and a range of demographic and health variables. We then compared the predictive accuracy of these models in a held-out 25 % testing subset using areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and the integrated discrimination improvement index (IDI). We used random forest multiple imputation to address missing data.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The model including main effects only modestly predicted quit success at 6 months (AUROC = 0.646, 95 % CI = 0.631, 0.660). The final model with all interactions had essentially identical performance (AUROC = 0.640, 95 % CI = 0.626, 0.654; IDI = −0.0066).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>We found no evidence of meaningful interactions between treatment outcomes and participants' characteristics, NRT type, or NRT dose. Although data are observational, these findings suggest that the effectiveness of different types and doses of NRT do not vary substantially with participant characteristics. Personalization based on the overall likelihood of quit success, or using genetic or other biological data, remains possible.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":17148,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment","volume":"141 ","pages":"Article 108847"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can nicotine replacement therapy be personalized? A statistical learning analysis\",\"authors\":\"Scott Veldhuizen ,&nbsp;Laurie Zawertailo ,&nbsp;Sarwar Hussain ,&nbsp;Sabrina Voci ,&nbsp;Peter Selby\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jsat.2022.108847\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Technology has made automated care personalization practical, but useful personalization requires information about systematic differences between individuals in the effectiveness of different interventions. Here, we used observational data to search for differences in smoking cessation<span><span> treatment outcomes associated with interactions between participant characteristics and different types and doses of </span>nicotine replacement therapy (NRT).</span></p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p><span>We analyzed 33,077 enrollments in a large primary care </span>smoking cessation program in Ontario, Canada. We considered 10 types and combinations of NRT, as well as the provided daily dose of nicotine. We used ridge regression to fit one main effects model and one model including all possible interactions between these measures and a range of demographic and health variables. We then compared the predictive accuracy of these models in a held-out 25 % testing subset using areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and the integrated discrimination improvement index (IDI). We used random forest multiple imputation to address missing data.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The model including main effects only modestly predicted quit success at 6 months (AUROC = 0.646, 95 % CI = 0.631, 0.660). The final model with all interactions had essentially identical performance (AUROC = 0.640, 95 % CI = 0.626, 0.654; IDI = −0.0066).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>We found no evidence of meaningful interactions between treatment outcomes and participants' characteristics, NRT type, or NRT dose. Although data are observational, these findings suggest that the effectiveness of different types and doses of NRT do not vary substantially with participant characteristics. Personalization based on the overall likelihood of quit success, or using genetic or other biological data, remains possible.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17148,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment\",\"volume\":\"141 \",\"pages\":\"Article 108847\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0740547222001295\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0740547222001295","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

技术已经使自动化护理个性化成为现实,但有用的个性化需要关于不同干预措施有效性的个体之间系统差异的信息。在这里,我们使用观察性数据来寻找与参与者特征和不同类型和剂量的尼古丁替代疗法(NRT)之间相互作用相关的戒烟治疗结果的差异。方法:我们分析了加拿大安大略省一个大型初级保健戒烟项目的33,077名登记患者。我们考虑了10种NRT的类型和组合,以及提供的每日尼古丁剂量。我们使用脊回归来拟合一个主效应模型和一个包括这些措施与一系列人口和健康变量之间所有可能相互作用的模型。然后,我们使用受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUROC)和综合判别改善指数(IDI)比较了这些模型在25%测试子集中的预测准确性。我们使用随机森林多重插值来解决缺失数据。结果包含主效应的模型仅能适度预测6个月戒烟成功(AUROC = 0.646, 95% CI = 0.631, 0.660)。所有相互作用的最终模型的性能基本相同(AUROC = 0.640, 95% CI = 0.626, 0.654;idi =−0.0066)。结论:我们没有发现治疗结果与受试者特征、NRT类型或NRT剂量之间有意义的相互作用的证据。虽然数据是观察性的,但这些发现表明,不同类型和剂量的NRT的有效性并不因参与者的特征而有很大差异。基于戒烟成功的总体可能性,或使用基因或其他生物学数据的个性化仍然是可能的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Can nicotine replacement therapy be personalized? A statistical learning analysis

Background

Technology has made automated care personalization practical, but useful personalization requires information about systematic differences between individuals in the effectiveness of different interventions. Here, we used observational data to search for differences in smoking cessation treatment outcomes associated with interactions between participant characteristics and different types and doses of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT).

Methods

We analyzed 33,077 enrollments in a large primary care smoking cessation program in Ontario, Canada. We considered 10 types and combinations of NRT, as well as the provided daily dose of nicotine. We used ridge regression to fit one main effects model and one model including all possible interactions between these measures and a range of demographic and health variables. We then compared the predictive accuracy of these models in a held-out 25 % testing subset using areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and the integrated discrimination improvement index (IDI). We used random forest multiple imputation to address missing data.

Results

The model including main effects only modestly predicted quit success at 6 months (AUROC = 0.646, 95 % CI = 0.631, 0.660). The final model with all interactions had essentially identical performance (AUROC = 0.640, 95 % CI = 0.626, 0.654; IDI = −0.0066).

Conclusion

We found no evidence of meaningful interactions between treatment outcomes and participants' characteristics, NRT type, or NRT dose. Although data are observational, these findings suggest that the effectiveness of different types and doses of NRT do not vary substantially with participant characteristics. Personalization based on the overall likelihood of quit success, or using genetic or other biological data, remains possible.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
10.30%
发文量
220
期刊介绍: The Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment (JSAT) features original reviews, training and educational articles, special commentary, and especially research articles that are meaningful to the treatment of alcohol, heroin, marijuana, and other drugs of dependence. JSAT is directed toward treatment practitioners from all disciplines (medicine, nursing, social work, psychology, and counseling) in both private and public sectors, including those involved in schools, health centers, community agencies, correctional facilities, and individual practices. The editors emphasize that JSAT articles should address techniques and treatment approaches that can be used directly by contemporary practitioners.
期刊最新文献
Not in my treatment center: Leadership's perception of barriers to MOUD adoption Peer support to reduce readmission in Medicaid-enrolled adults with substance use disorder National trends in buprenorphine prescribing before and during the COVID-19 pandemic A qualitative analysis of barriers to opioid agonist treatment for racial/ethnic minoritized populations An intervention pilot to facilitate harm reduction service decentralization in Vietnam
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1