Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35365801›Full record

SynthesisMolecular psychiatry2022

Clinical prediction models in psychiatry: a systematic review of two decades of progress and challenges.

Alan J Meehan, Stephanie J Lewis, Seena Fazel, Paolo Fusar-Poli, Ewout W Steyerberg, Daniel Stahl, Andrea Danese

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Molecular psychiatry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 109 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
109citing papers in PubMed, 13 pooled it
34.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

109 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 196 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Prediction Models for Maternal and Offspring Short- and Long-Term Outcomes Following Gestational Diabetes: A Systematic Review.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2025
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Trial
  15. Big data and psychiatry: advances, constraints and future directions.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2026
    Article
  16. Rethinking biomarkers in psychiatry: from etiological uncertainty to actionable prediction.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2026
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

49 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.

Alan J MeehanDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7169-997X
Stephanie J LewisDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4153-5728
Seena FazelDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Paolo Fusar-PoliEarly Psychosis: Interventions and Clinical-detection (EPIC) Lab, Department of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3582-6788
Ewout W SteyerbergDepartment of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Daniel StahlDepartment of Biostatistics and Health Informatics, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7987-6619
Andrea DaneseSocial, Genetic and Developmental Psychiatry Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK. andrea.danese@kcl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8718-5412
King's College London · GBLeiden University Medical Center · NLUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

Department of HealthMedical Research Council MR/P005918/1Wellcome Trust 202836/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent years have seen the rapid proliferation of clinical prediction models aiming to support risk stratification and individualized care within psychiatry. Despite growing interest, attempts to synthesize current evidence in the nascent field of precision psychiatry have remained scarce. This systematic review therefore sought to summarize progress towards clinical implementation of prediction modeling for psychiatric outcomes. We searched MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, and PsychINFO databases from inception to September 30, 2020, for English-language articles that developed and/or validated multivariable models to predict (at an individual level) onset, course, or treatment response for non-organic psychiatric disorders (PROSPERO: CRD42020216530). Individual prediction models were evaluated based on three key criteria: (i) mitigation of bias and overfitting; (ii) generalizability, and (iii) clinical utility. The Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST) was used to formally appraise each study's risk of bias. 228 studies detailing 308 prediction models were ultimately eligible for inclusion. 94.5% of developed prediction models were deemed to be at high risk of bias, largely due to inadequate or inappropriate analytic decisions. Insufficient internal validation efforts (within the development sample) were also observed, while only one-fifth of models underwent external validation in an independent sample. Finally, our search identified just one published model whose potential utility in clinical practice was formally assessed. Our findings illustrated significant growth in precision psychiatry with promising progress towards real-world application. Nevertheless, these efforts have been inhibited by a preponderance of bias and overfitting, while the generalizability and clinical utility of many published models has yet to be formally established. Through improved methodological rigor during initial development, robust evaluations of reproducibility via independent validation, and evidence-based implementation frameworks, future research has the potential to generate risk prediction tools capable of enhancing clinical decision-making in psychiatric care.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalPsychiatryBiasHumansPrognosisReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID35365801
PMCPMC9156409
OpenAlexW4221067412

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.