Cited by 532Machine Learning in HealthcareArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education

The promise of machine learning in predicting treatment outcomes in psychiatry

Open access
Chekroud, Adam M., Bondar, Julia, Delgadillo, Jaime, Doherty, Gavin, Wasil, Akash, Fokkema, Marjolein, Cohen, Zachary, Belgrave, Danielle +4 more·2021·World Psychiatry

Abstract

For many years, psychiatrists have tried to understand factors involved in response to medications or psychotherapies, in order to personalize their treatment choices. There is now a broad and growing interest in the idea that we can develop models to personalize treatment decisions using new statistical approaches from the field of machine learning and applying them to larger volumes of data. In this pursuit, there has been a paradigm shift away from experimental studies to confirm or refute specific hypotheses towards a focus on the overall explanatory power of a predictive model when tested on new, unseen datasets. In this paper, we review key studies using machine learning to predict treatment outcomes in psychiatry, ranging from medications and psychotherapies to digital interventions and neurobiological treatments. Next, we focus on some new sources of data that are being used for the development of predictive models based on machine learning, such as electronic health records, smartphone and social media data, and on the potential utility of data from genetics, electrophysiology, neuroimaging and cognitive testing. Finally, we discuss how far the field has come towards implementing prediction tools in real‐world clinical practice. Relatively few retrospective studies to‐date include appropriate external validation procedures, and there are even fewer prospective studies testing the clinical feasibility and effectiveness of predictive models. Applications of machine learning in psychiatry face some of the same ethical challenges posed by these techniques in other areas of medicine or computer science, which we discuss here. In short, machine learning is a nascent but important approach to improve the effectiveness of mental health care, and several prospective clinical studies suggest that it may be working already.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/wps.20882

Cites

221 of 221 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Prior work in clinical decision support and mental health law has emphasized the limitations of purely statistical or black-box models in capturing the ambiguity of psychiatric documentation and judicial interpretation.

    “Prior work in clinical decision support and mental health law has emphasized the limitations of purely statistical or black-box models in capturing the ambiguity of psychiatric documentation and judicial interpretation (Chekroud et al., 2021; McCradden et al., 2023).”

    From A hybrid fuzzy logic–Random Forest model to predict psychiatric treatment order outcomes: an interpretable tool for legal decision support (2025) · cites this paper as Chekroud et al., 2021

    The “HOW CLOSE WE HAVE COME TO REAL-WORLD IMPLEMENTATION” section (page not specified) says black-box models can be difficult for clinicians to interpret and that accurate algorithms alone are insufficient for clinical decision support. The paper mentions text-based clinical notes, but does not say such models fail to capture ambiguity in psychiatric documentation or judicial interpretation. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [26]26. (PReDicT): an open-label , randomised controlled trial. Neuropsychophar­ macology (in press).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chekroud, A. M., Bondar, J., Delgadillo, J., Doherty, G., Wasil, A., Fokkema, M., Cohen, Z., Belgrave, D., DeRubeis, R., Iniesta, R., Dwyer, D., & Choi, K.
Affiliations
  • Yale University (US)
  • Spring Health New York City NY USA
  • University of Sheffield (GB)
  • Trinity College Dublin (IE)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • Leiden University (NL)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • Microsoft Research (United Kingdom) (GB)
  • King's College London (GB)
  • Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
  • Harvard University (US)
Venue
World Psychiatry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2021-05-18
Volume
20
Issue
2
Pages
154-170
ISSN
  • 1723-8617 (ISSN-L)
  • 2051-5545
OpenAlex
W3160467094
Cited by
531
References
221
Citations by year
2026: 119 · 2025: 122 · 2024: 115 · 2023: 90 · 2022: 68 · 2021: 16
FWCI
25.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • World Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research
  • NIHR Maudsley Biomedical Research Centre
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Keywords
machine learning, treatment outcome prediction, personalized treatment, psychotherapy response, digital interventions, electronic health records, genetic data, neuroimaging, external validation, clinical implementation, mental health services

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review