Individualized prediction models in ADHD: a systematic review and meta-regression
Individualized prediction models in ADHD: a systematic review and meta-regression
There have been increasing efforts to develop prediction models supporting personalised detection, prediction, or treatment of ADHD. We overviewed the current status of prediction science in ADHD by: (1) systematically reviewing and appraising available prediction models; (2) quantitatively assessing factors impacting the performance of published models. We did a PRISMA/CHARMS/TRIPOD-compliant systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42023387502), searching, until 20/12/2023, studies reporting internally and/or externally validated diagnostic/prognostic/treatment-response prediction models in ADHD. Using meta-regressions, we explored the impact of factors affecting the area under the curve (AUC) of the models. We assessed the study risk of bias with the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). From 7764 identified records, 100 prediction models were included (88% diagnostic, 5% prognostic, and 7% treatment-response). Of these, 96% and 7% were internally and externally validated, respectively. None was implemented in clinical practice. Only 8% of the models were deemed at low risk of bias; 67% were considered at high risk of bias. Clinical, neuroimaging, and cognitive predictors were used in 35%, 31%, and 27% of the studies, respectively. The performance of ADHD prediction models was increased in those models including, compared to those models not including, clinical predictors (β = 6.54, p = 0.007). Type of validation, age range, type of model, number of predictors, study quality, and other type of predictors did not alter the AUC. Several prediction models have been developed to support the diagnosis of ADHD. However, efforts to predict outcomes or treatment response have been limited, and none of the available models is ready for implementation into clinical practice. The use of clinical predictors, which may be combined with other type of predictors, seems to improve the performance of the models. A new generation of research should address these gaps by conducting high quality, replicable, and externally validated models, followed by implementation research.
3865-3873
Pablo, Gonzalo Salazar de
12231d1e-94a6-495b-a5ff-2b4b99cbd37e
Iniesta, Raquel
160db285-87d8-4b4c-b18b-f0119df11830
Bellato, Alessio
0ee4c34f-3850-4883-8b82-5717b74990f7
Caye, Arthur
7d2afae2-c888-432b-b69e-c3904b449344
Dobrosavljevic, Maja
9f5dd368-0404-4930-b854-265f89592db7
Parlatini, Valeria
6cdfb200-40ce-43ce-84da-dcb6eba0f67a
Garcia-Argibay, Miguel
e5a6941e-4dcc-401a-9de4-09557c8856ef
Li, Lin
7864ce7c-4b85-438b-93d7-2f3d7606ad01
Cabras, Anna
505d7950-e528-498a-9241-b637725807d4
Ali, Mian Haider
9c206a39-d510-4225-8774-07d2f624ed62
Archer, Lucinda
35db3734-da17-45fc-b89b-d29e4932ff46
Meehan, Alan J.
23e81ddd-0594-49c9-a472-a18555422406
Suleiman, Halima
020958db-1e6e-42fd-b407-0cf3d95d2315
Solmi, Marco
2022a2e4-774d-4811-b1db-b6dbfedbd10d
Fusar-Poli, Paolo
dfb80ff8-8a29-4a23-899d-e7311b855433
Chang, Zheng
86831bee-800b-469f-b67f-a5b7790cef80
Faraone, Stephen V.
11abe086-d301-4ca2-bbd5-d7a516be924f
Larsson, Henrik
1d1c897c-ad54-4ffc-bf84-46b2a57f5bf4
Cortese, Samuele
53d4bf2c-4e0e-4c77-9385-218350560fdb
23 May 2024
Pablo, Gonzalo Salazar de
12231d1e-94a6-495b-a5ff-2b4b99cbd37e
Iniesta, Raquel
160db285-87d8-4b4c-b18b-f0119df11830
Bellato, Alessio
0ee4c34f-3850-4883-8b82-5717b74990f7
Caye, Arthur
7d2afae2-c888-432b-b69e-c3904b449344
Dobrosavljevic, Maja
9f5dd368-0404-4930-b854-265f89592db7
Parlatini, Valeria
6cdfb200-40ce-43ce-84da-dcb6eba0f67a
Garcia-Argibay, Miguel
e5a6941e-4dcc-401a-9de4-09557c8856ef
Li, Lin
7864ce7c-4b85-438b-93d7-2f3d7606ad01
Cabras, Anna
505d7950-e528-498a-9241-b637725807d4
Ali, Mian Haider
9c206a39-d510-4225-8774-07d2f624ed62
Archer, Lucinda
35db3734-da17-45fc-b89b-d29e4932ff46
Meehan, Alan J.
23e81ddd-0594-49c9-a472-a18555422406
Suleiman, Halima
020958db-1e6e-42fd-b407-0cf3d95d2315
Solmi, Marco
2022a2e4-774d-4811-b1db-b6dbfedbd10d
Fusar-Poli, Paolo
dfb80ff8-8a29-4a23-899d-e7311b855433
Chang, Zheng
86831bee-800b-469f-b67f-a5b7790cef80
Faraone, Stephen V.
11abe086-d301-4ca2-bbd5-d7a516be924f
Larsson, Henrik
1d1c897c-ad54-4ffc-bf84-46b2a57f5bf4
Cortese, Samuele
53d4bf2c-4e0e-4c77-9385-218350560fdb
Pablo, Gonzalo Salazar de, Iniesta, Raquel, Bellato, Alessio, Caye, Arthur, Dobrosavljevic, Maja, Parlatini, Valeria, Garcia-Argibay, Miguel, Li, Lin, Cabras, Anna, Ali, Mian Haider, Archer, Lucinda, Meehan, Alan J., Suleiman, Halima, Solmi, Marco, Fusar-Poli, Paolo, Chang, Zheng, Faraone, Stephen V., Larsson, Henrik and Cortese, Samuele
(2024)
Individualized prediction models in ADHD: a systematic review and meta-regression.
Molecular Psychiatry, 29 (12), .
(doi:10.1038/s41380-024-02606-5).
Abstract
There have been increasing efforts to develop prediction models supporting personalised detection, prediction, or treatment of ADHD. We overviewed the current status of prediction science in ADHD by: (1) systematically reviewing and appraising available prediction models; (2) quantitatively assessing factors impacting the performance of published models. We did a PRISMA/CHARMS/TRIPOD-compliant systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42023387502), searching, until 20/12/2023, studies reporting internally and/or externally validated diagnostic/prognostic/treatment-response prediction models in ADHD. Using meta-regressions, we explored the impact of factors affecting the area under the curve (AUC) of the models. We assessed the study risk of bias with the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). From 7764 identified records, 100 prediction models were included (88% diagnostic, 5% prognostic, and 7% treatment-response). Of these, 96% and 7% were internally and externally validated, respectively. None was implemented in clinical practice. Only 8% of the models were deemed at low risk of bias; 67% were considered at high risk of bias. Clinical, neuroimaging, and cognitive predictors were used in 35%, 31%, and 27% of the studies, respectively. The performance of ADHD prediction models was increased in those models including, compared to those models not including, clinical predictors (β = 6.54, p = 0.007). Type of validation, age range, type of model, number of predictors, study quality, and other type of predictors did not alter the AUC. Several prediction models have been developed to support the diagnosis of ADHD. However, efforts to predict outcomes or treatment response have been limited, and none of the available models is ready for implementation into clinical practice. The use of clinical predictors, which may be combined with other type of predictors, seems to improve the performance of the models. A new generation of research should address these gaps by conducting high quality, replicable, and externally validated models, followed by implementation research.
Text
s41380-024-02606-5
- Version of Record
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 30 April 2024
e-pub ahead of print date: 9 May 2024
Published date: 23 May 2024
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 490735
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/490735
ISSN: 1359-4184
PURE UUID: e82c8c26-ebd4-4e25-bd4b-e2d15aecf701
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 04 Jun 2024 17:01
Last modified: 11 Dec 2024 03:13
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Gonzalo Salazar de Pablo
Author:
Raquel Iniesta
Author:
Alessio Bellato
Author:
Arthur Caye
Author:
Maja Dobrosavljevic
Author:
Valeria Parlatini
Author:
Miguel Garcia-Argibay
Author:
Lin Li
Author:
Anna Cabras
Author:
Mian Haider Ali
Author:
Lucinda Archer
Author:
Alan J. Meehan
Author:
Halima Suleiman
Author:
Marco Solmi
Author:
Paolo Fusar-Poli
Author:
Zheng Chang
Author:
Stephen V. Faraone
Author:
Henrik Larsson
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics