Composite interaction tree for simultaneous learning of optimal individualized treatment rules and subgroups

Developing an individualized treatment rule for Veterans with major depressive disorder using electronic health records

Efforts to develop an individualized treatment rule (ITR) to optimize major depressive disorder (MDD) treatment with antidepressant medication (ADM), psychotherapy, or combined ADM-psychotherapy have been hampered by small samples, small predictor sets, and suboptimal analysis methods. Analyses of large administrative databases designed to approximate experiments followed iteratively by pragmatic trials hold promise for resolving these problems. The current report presents a proof-of-concept study using electronic health records (EHR) of n = 43,470 outpatients beginning MDD treatment in Veterans Health Administration Primary Care Mental Health Integration (PC-MHI) clinics, which offer access not only to ADMs but also psychotherapy and combined ADM-psychotherapy. EHR and geospatial databases were used to generate an extensive baseline predictor set (5,865 variables). The outcome was a composite measure of at least one serious negative event (suicide attempt, psychiatric emergency department visit, psychiatric hospitalization, suicide death) over the next 12 months. Best-practices methods were used to adjust for nonrandom treatment assignment and to estimate a preliminary ITR in a 70% training sample and to evaluate the ITR in the 30% test sample. Statistically significant aggregate variation was found in overall probability of the outcome related to baseline predictors (AU-ROC = 0.68, S.E. = 0.01), with test sample outcome prevalence of 32.6% among the 5% of patients having highest predicted risk compared to 7.1% in the remainder of the test sample. The ITR found that psychotherapy-only was the optimal treatment for 56.0% of patients (roughly 20% lower risk of the outcome than if receiving one of the other treatments) and that treatment type was unrelated to outcome risk among other patients. Change in aggregate treatment costs of implementing this ITR would be negligible, as 16.1% fewer patients would be prescribed ADMs and 2.9% more would receive psychotherapy. A pragmatic trial would be needed to confirm the accuracy of the ITR.

Is it really a neuromyth? A meta-analysis of the learning styles matching hypothesis

Learning styles have been a contentious topic in education for years. The purpose of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis of the effects of matching instruction to modality learning styles compared to unmatched instruction on learning outcomes. A systematic search of the research findings yielded 21 eligible studies with 101 effect sizes and 1,712 participants for the meta-analysis. Based on robust variance estimation, there was an overall benefit of matching instruction to learning styles, g = 0.31, SE = 0.12, 95% CI = [0.05, 0.57], p = 0.02. However, only 26% of learning outcome measures indicated matched instruction benefits for at least two styles, indicating a crossover interaction supportive of the matching hypothesis. In total, 12 studies without sufficient statistical details for the meta-analysis were also examined for an indication of a crossover effect; 25% of these studies had findings indicative of a crossover interaction. Given the time and financial expenses of implementation coupled with low study quality, the benefits of matching instruction to learning styles are interpreted as too small and too infrequent to warrant widespread adoption.

Synthesizing independent stagewise trials for optimal dynamic treatment regimes

Dynamic treatment regimes (DTRs) adaptively prescribe treatments based on patients' intermediate responses and evolving health status over multiple treatment stages. Data from sequential multiple assignment randomization trials (SMARTs) are recommended to be used for learning DTRs. However, due to re-randomization of the same patients over multiple treatment stages and a prolonged follow-up period, SMARTs are often difficult to implement and costly to manage, and patient adherence is always a concern in practice. To lessen such practical challenges, we propose an alternative approach to learn optimal DTRs by synthesizing independent trials over different stages. Specifically, at each stage, data from a single randomized trial along with patients' natural medical history and health status in previous stages are used. We use a backward learning method to estimate optimal treatment decisions at a particular stage, where patients' future optimal outcome increments are estimated using data observed from independent trials with future stages' information. Under some conditions, we show that the proposed method yields consistent estimation of the optimal DTRs and we obtain the same learning rates as those from SMARTs. We conduct simulation studies to demonstrate the advantage of the proposed method. Finally, we learn optimal DTRs for treating major depressive disorder (MDD) by stagewise synthesis of two randomized trials. We perform a validation study on independent subjects and show that the synthesized DTRs lead to the greatest MDD symptom reduction compared to alternative methods.