Perfectionism, disordered eating and well-being in aesthetic sports: The mediating role of passion.

Aesthetic athletes face higher risks of disordered eating, and perfectionism is one of the determinants involved. While research suggests that perfectionism in sport may play a role in physical and psychological well-being, its influence remains to be confirmed. As such, further examination of the influence of perfectionism on health is warranted as it could lead to better interventions. This preregistered research sought to shed new light on these relationships by investigating the mediating role of passion in the perfectionism-disordered eating relationship as well as physical and psychological well-being in aesthetic sports. In Study 1, 229 American recreational and competitive athletes practicing either gymnastics (n = 150) or artistic swimming (n = 79) were recruited on MTurk to complete an online questionnaire. The same recruitment procedure was used for Study 2, with 107 American gymnasts (n = 69) and artistic swimmers (n = 38) completing the questionnaire at two timepoints, one year apart. Results from path analyses showed that socially prescribed perfectionism was associated with obsessive passion, which in turn was associated with disordered eating. Self-oriented perfectionism was associated with both obsessive and harmonious passion, the latter being more adaptative as it was associated with physical and psychological well-being. Thus, the way one engages in aesthetic sports matters, as engaging with obsessive passion may take a toll on one's health and lead to disordered eating. Conversely, fostering harmonious engagement seems to temper the negative associations between perfectionism and health outcomes and promote positive relationships with athlete's well-being, but requires further study.

Correction: Evaluating the Clinical Feasibility of an Artificial Intelligence-Powered, Web-Based Clinical Decision Support System for the Treatment of Depression in Adults: Longitudinal Feasibility Study.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.2196/31862.].

Towards Outcome-Driven Patient Subgroups: A Machine Learning Analysis Across Six Depression Treatment Studies.

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a heterogeneous condition; multiple underlying neurobiological and behavioral substrates are associated with treatment response variability. Understanding the sources of this variability and predicting outcomes has been elusive. Machine learning (ML) shows promise in predicting treatment response in MDD, but its application is limited by challenges to the clinical interpretability of ML models, and clinicians often lack confidence in model results. In order to improve the interpretability of ML models in clinical practice, our goal was to demonstrate the derivation of treatment-relevant patient profiles comprised of clinical and demographic information using a novel ML approach. METHODS: We analyzed data from six clinical trials of pharmacological treatment for depression (total n = 5438) using the Differential Prototypes Neural Network (DPNN), a ML model that derives patient prototypes which can be used to derive treatment-relevant patient clusters while learning to generate probabilities for differential treatment response. A model classifying remission and outputting individual remission probabilities for five first-line monotherapies and three combination treatments was trained using clinical and demographic data. Prototypes were evaluated for interpretability by assessing differences in feature distributions (e.g. age, sex, symptom severity) and treatment-specific outcomes. RESULTS: A 3-prototype model achieved an area under the receiver operating curve of 0.66 and an expected absolute improvement in remission rate for those receiving the best predicted treatment of 6.5% (relative improvement of 15.6%) compared to the population remission rate. We identified three treatment-relevant patient clusters. Cluster A patients tended to be younger, to have increased levels of fatigue, and more severe symptoms. Cluster B patients tended to be older, female, have less severe symptoms, and the highest remission rates. Cluster C patients had more severe symptoms, lower remission rates, more psychomotor agitation, more intense suicidal ideation, and more somatic genital symptoms. CONCLUSION: It is possible to produce novel treatment-relevant patient profiles using ML models; doing so may improve interpretability of ML models and the quality of precision medicine treatments for MDD.

A systematic meta-review of patient-level predictors of psychological therapy outcome in major depressive disorder.

BACKGROUND: Psychological therapies are effective for treating major depressive disorder, but current clinical guidelines do not provide guidance on the personalization of treatment choice. Established predictors of psychotherapy treatment response could help inform machine learning models aimed at predicting individual patient responses to different therapy options. Here we sought to comprehensively identify known predictors. METHODS: EMBASE, Medline, PubMed, PsycINFO were searched for systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis published until June 2020 to identify individual patient-level predictors of response to psychological treatments. 3113 abstracts were identified and 300 articles assessed. We qualitatively synthesized our findings by predictor category (sociodemographic; symptom profile; social support; personality features; affective, cognitive, and behavioural; comorbidities; neuroimaging; genetics) and treatment type. We used the AMSTAR 2 to evaluate the quality of included reviews. RESULTS: Following screening and full-text assessment, 27 systematic reviews including 12 meta-analyses were eligible for inclusion. 74 predictors emerged for various psychological treatments, primarily cognitive behavioural therapy, interpersonal therapy, and mindfulness-based cognitive therapy. LIMITATIONS: A paucity of studies examining predictors of psychological treatment outcome, as well as methodological heterogeneities and publication biases limit the strength of the identified predictors. CONCLUSIONS: The synthesized predictors could be used to supplement clinical decision-making in selecting psychological therapies based on individual patient characteristics. These predictors could also be used as a priori input features for machine learning models aimed at predicting a given patient's likelihood of response to different treatment options for depression, and may contribute toward the development of patient-specific treatment recommendations in clinical guidelines.

Evaluating the perceived utility of an artificial intelligence-powered clinical decision support system for depression treatment using a simulation center.

Aifred is a clinical decision support system (CDSS) that uses artificial intelligence to assist physicians in selecting treatments for major depressive disorder (MDD) by providing probabilities of remission for different treatment options based on patient characteristics. We evaluated the utility of the CDSS as perceived by physicians participating in simulated clinical interactions. Twenty physicians who were either staff or residents in psychiatry or family medicine completed a study in which they had three 10-minute clinical interactions with standardized patients portraying mild, moderate, and severe episodes of MDD. During these scenarios, physicians were given access to the CDSS, which they could use in their treatment decisions. The perceived utility of the CDSS was assessed through self-report questionnaires, scenario observations, and interviews. 60% of physicians perceived the CDSS to be a useful tool in their treatment-selection process, with family physicians perceiving the greatest utility. Moreover, 50% of physicians would use the tool for all patients with depression, with an additional 35% noting that they would reserve the tool for more severe or treatment-resistant patients. Furthermore, clinicians found the tool to be useful in discussing treatment options with patients. The efficacy of this CDSS and its potential to improve treatment outcomes must be further evaluated in clinical trials.

Evaluating the Clinical Feasibility of an Artificial Intelligence-Powered, Web-Based Clinical Decision Support System for the Treatment of Depression in Adults: Longitudinal Feasibility Study.

BACKGROUND: Approximately two-thirds of patients with major depressive disorder do not achieve remission during their first treatment. There has been increasing interest in the use of digital, artificial intelligence-powered clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) to assist physicians in their treatment selection and management, improving the personalization and use of best practices such as measurement-based care. Previous literature shows that for digital mental health tools to be successful, the tool must be easy for patients and physicians to use and feasible within existing clinical workflows. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to examine the feasibility of an artificial intelligence-powered CDSS, which combines the operationalized 2016 Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments guidelines with a neural network-based individualized treatment remission prediction. METHODS: Owing to the COVID-19 pandemic, the study was adapted to be completed entirely remotely. A total of 7 physicians recruited outpatients diagnosed with major depressive disorder according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition criteria. Patients completed a minimum of one visit without the CDSS (baseline) and 2 subsequent visits where the CDSS was used by the physician (visits 1 and 2). The primary outcome of interest was change in appointment length after the introduction of the CDSS as a proxy for feasibility. Feasibility and acceptability data were collected through self-report questionnaires and semistructured interviews. RESULTS: Data were collected between January and November 2020. A total of 17 patients were enrolled in the study; of the 17 patients, 14 (82%) completed the study. There was no significant difference in appointment length between visits (introduction of the tool did not increase appointment length; F2,24=0.805; mean squared error 58.08; P=.46). In total, 92% (12/13) of patients and 71% (5/7) of physicians felt that the tool was easy to use; 62% (8/13) of patients and 71% (5/7) of physicians rated that they trusted the CDSS. Of the 13 patients, 6 (46%) felt that the patient-clinician relationship significantly or somewhat improved, whereas 7 (54%) felt that it did not change. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings confirm that the integration of the tool does not significantly increase appointment length and suggest that the CDSS is easy to use and may have positive effects on the patient-physician relationship for some patients. The CDSS is feasible and ready for effectiveness studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04061642; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04061642.

Identification of Suicidal Ideation in the Canadian Community Health Survey-Mental Health Component Using Deep Learning.

Introduction: Suicidal ideation (SI) is prevalent in the general population, and is a risk factor for suicide. Predicting which patients are likely to have SI remains challenging. Deep Learning (DL) may be a useful tool in this context, as it can be used to find patterns in complex, heterogeneous, and incomplete datasets. An automated screening system for SI could help prompt clinicians to be more attentive to patients at risk for suicide. Methods: Using the Canadian Community Health Survey-Mental Health Component, we trained a DL model based on 23,859 survey responses to classify patients with and without SI. Models were created to classify both lifetime SI and SI over the last 12 months. From 582 possible parameters we produced 96- and 21-feature versions of the models. Models were trained using an undersampling procedure that balanced the training set between SI and non-SI; validation was done on held-out data. Results: For lifetime SI, the 96 feature model had an Area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) of 0.79 and the 21 feature model had an AUC of 0.77. For SI in the last 12 months the 96 feature model had an AUC of 0.71 and the 21 feature model had an AUC of 0.68. In addition, sensitivity analyses demonstrated feature relationships in line with existing literature. Discussion: Although further study is required to ensure clinical relevance and sample generalizability, this study is an initial proof of concept for the use of DL to improve identification of SI. Sensitivity analyses can help improve the interpretability of DL models. This kind of model would help start conversations with patients which could lead to improved care and a reduction in suicidal behavior.

Using a simulation centre to evaluate preliminary acceptability and impact of an artificial intelligence-powered clinical decision support system for depression treatment on the physician-patient interaction.

BACKGROUND: Recently, artificial intelligence-powered devices have been put forward as potentially powerful tools for the improvement of mental healthcare. An important question is how these devices impact the physician-patient interaction. AIMS: Aifred is an artificial intelligence-powered clinical decision support system (CDSS) for the treatment of major depression. Here, we explore the use of a simulation centre environment in evaluating the usability of Aifred, particularly its impact on the physician-patient interaction. METHOD: Twenty psychiatry and family medicine attending staff and residents were recruited to complete a 2.5-h study at a clinical interaction simulation centre with standardised patients. Each physician had the option of using the CDSS to inform their treatment choice in three 10-min clinical scenarios with standardised patients portraying mild, moderate and severe episodes of major depression. Feasibility and acceptability data were collected through self-report questionnaires, scenario observations, interviews and standardised patient feedback. RESULTS: All 20 participants completed the study. Initial results indicate that the tool was acceptable to clinicians and feasible for use during clinical encounters. Clinicians indicated a willingness to use the tool in real clinical practice, a significant degree of trust in the system's predictions to assist with treatment selection, and reported that the tool helped increase patient understanding of and trust in treatment. The simulation environment allowed for the evaluation of the tool's impact on the physician-patient interaction. CONCLUSIONS: The simulation centre allowed for direct observations of clinician use and impact of the tool on the clinician-patient interaction before clinical studies. It may therefore offer a useful and important environment in the early testing of new technological tools. The present results will inform further tool development and clinician training materials.

A systematic meta-review of predictors of antidepressant treatment outcome in major depressive disorder.

INTRODUCTION: The heterogeneity of symptoms and complex etiology of depression pose a significant challenge to the personalization of treatment. Meanwhile, the current application of generic treatment approaches to patients with vastly differing biological and clinical profiles is far from optimal. Here, we conduct a meta-review to identify predictors of response to antidepressant therapy in order to select robust input features for machine learning models of treatment response. These machine learning models will allow us to learn associations between patient features and treatment response which have predictive value at the individual patient level; this learning can be optimized by selecting high-quality input features for the model. While current research is difficult to directly apply to the clinic, machine learning models built using knowledge gleaned from current research may become useful clinical tools. METHODS: The EMBASE and MEDLINE/PubMed online databases were searched from January 1996 to August 2017, using a combination of MeSH terms and keywords to identify relevant literature reviews. We identified a total of 1909 articles, wherein 199 articles met our inclusion criteria. RESULTS: An array of genetic, immune, endocrine, neuroimaging, sociodemographic, and symptom-based predictors of treatment response were extracted, varying widely in clinical utility. LIMITATIONS: Due to heterogeneous sample sizes, effect sizes, publication biases, and methodological disparities across reviews, we could not accurately assess the strength and directionality of every predictor. CONCLUSION: Notwithstanding our cautious interpretation of the results, we have identified a multitude of predictors that can be used to formulate a priori hypotheses regarding the input features for a computational model. We highlight the importance of large-scale research initiatives and clinically accessible biomarkers, as well as the need for replication studies of current findings. In addition, we provide recommendations for future improvement and standardization of research efforts in this field.