Cited by 35Treatment of Major DepressionMachine Learning in HealthcareArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare

ARPNet: Antidepressant Response Prediction Network for Major Depressive Disorder

Open access
Chang, Buru, Choi, Yonghwa, Jeon, Minji, Lee, Junhyun, Han, Kyu-Man, Kim, Aram, Ham, Byung-Joo, Kang, Jaewoo·2019·Genes

Abstract

Treating patients with major depressive disorder is challenging because it takes several months for antidepressants prescribed for the patients to take effect. This limitation may result in increased risks and treatment costs. To address this limitation, an accurate antidepressant response prediction model is needed. Recently, several studies have proposed models that extract useful features such as neuroimaging biomarkers and genetic variants from patient data, and use them as predictors for predicting the antidepressant responses of patients. However, it is impossible to utilize all the different types of predictors when making a clinical decision on what drugs to prescribe for a patient. Although a machine learning-based antidepressant response prediction model has been proposed to overcome this problem, the model cannot find the most effective antidepressant for a patient. Based on a neural network, we propose an Antidepressant Response Prediction Network (ARPNet) model capturing high-dimensional patterns from useful features. Based on a literature survey and data-driven feature selection, we extract useful features from patient data, and use the features as predictors. In ARPNet, the patient representation layer captures patient features and the antidepressant prescription representation layer captures antidepressant features. Utilizing the patient and antidepressant prescription representation vectors, ARPNet predicts the degree of antidepressant response. The experimental evaluation results demonstrate that our proposed ARPNet model outperforms machine learning-based models in predicting antidepressant response. Moreover, we demonstrate the applicability of ARPNet in downstream applications in use case scenarios.

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 · 10.3390/genes10110907

Cites

25 of 25 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?

  • In a small testing dataset (N = 13) of patients with MDD, 80% of the patients who were predicted to respond to treatment did in fact respond to their prescribed antidepressants.

    “In a small testing dataset (N = 13) of patients with MDD, 80% of the patients who were predicted to respond to treatment did in fact respond to their prescribed antidepressants.”

    From Irremediability in psychiatric euthanasia: examining the objective standard (2023) · cites this paper as Chang et al., 2019

    Section 3.2 describes testing predictions of response to prescribed antidepressants in patients with MDD and defines precision as the proportion of predicted responders who actually responded. Section 3.2.1 says the test set was 10% of 121 patients, but the passages in our copy do not establish an exact test-set size of 13. Section 3.2.3 reports improved precision without giving the claimed 80% figure, so those two numbers are not verified. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • A network was designed to output modeling about the predicted effectiveness of antidepressants for every patient, and outperformed baseline models both for prediction of response and of remission.

    “A network was designed to output modeling about the predicted effectiveness of antidepressants for every patient, and outperformed baseline models both for prediction of response and of remission.”

    From Irremediability in psychiatric euthanasia: examining the objective standard (2023) · cites this paper as Chang et al., 2019

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. [22]Kingma D.P. Ba J. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization arXiv 2014 1412.6980

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chang, B., Choi, Y., Jeon, M., Lee, J., Han, K.-M., Kim, A., Ham, B.-J., & Kang, J.
Affiliations
  • Korea University (KR)
  • Korea University Anam Hospital (KR)
Corresponding author
  • Ham, Byung-Joo
  • Kang, Jaewoo
Venue
Genes
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2019-11-07
Volume
10
Issue
11
Pages
907
ISSN
2073-4425 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2985449889
Cited by
35
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6
FWCI
2.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Genes (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Keywords
antidepressant response prediction, major depressive disorder, neural network model, patient representation, treatment response prediction
MeSH terms
Antidepressive Agents, Depressive Disorder, Major, Major Depressive Disorder, Drug Resistance, Humans, Software, Neural Networks, Computer, Treatment Outcome

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