Abstract:Introduction Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a prevalent and disabling condition. Approximately 30-50% of patients do not respond to first-line medication or psychotherapy. Therefore, several studies have investigated the predictive potential of pretreatment severity rating or neuroimaging features to guide clinical approaches that can speed optimal treatment selection. Objectives To evaluate the performance of 1) severity ratings (scores of Hamilton Depression/Anxiety Scale, illness duration, and sleep quality, etc.) and demographic characteristic and 2) brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) features in predicting treatment outcomes for MDD. Second, to assess performance variations among varied modalities and interventions in MRI studies. Methods We searched studies in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Science Direct databases before March 22, 2023. We extracted a confusion matrix for prediction in each study. Separate meta-analyses were performed for clinical and MRI studies. The logarithm of diagnostic odds ratio [log(DOR)], sensitivity, and specificity were conducted using Reitsma's random effect model. The area under curve (AUC) of summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was calculated. Subgroup analyses were conducted in MRI studies based on modalities: resting-state functional MRI (rsfMRI), task-based fMRI (tbfMRI), and structural MRI (sMRI), and interventions: antidepressant (including selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors [SSRI]) and electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). Meta-regression was conducted 1) between clinical and MRI studies and 2) among modality or intervention subgroups in MRI studies. Results We included ten studies used clinical features covering 6494 patients, yielded a log(DOR) of 1.42, AUC of 0.71, sensitivity of 0.61, and specificity of 0.74. In terms of MRI, 44 studies with 2623 patients were included, revealing an overall log(DOR) of 2.53. The AUC, sensitivity, and specificity were 0.89, 0.78, and 0.75. Studies using MRI features had a higher sensitivity (0.89 vs. 0.61) in predicting treatment outcomes than clinical features (P < 0.001). RsfMRI had higher specificity (0.79 vs. 0.69) than tbfMRI subgroup (P = 0.01). No significant differences were found between sMRI and other modalities, nor between antidepressants (SSRIs and others) and ECT. Antidepressant studies primarily identified predictive imaging features in limbic and default mode networks, while ECT mainly focused on limbic network. Conclusions Our findings suggest a robust promise for pretreatment brain MRI features in predicting treatment outcomes in MDD, offering higher accuracy than clinical studies. While tasks in tbfMRI studies differed, those studies overall had less predictive utility than rsfMRI data. For MRI studies, overlapping but distinct network level measures predicted outcomes for antidepressants and ECT. Disclosure of Interest None Declared

Clinical significance methods: Which one to use and how useful are they?

Assessing clinical significance: Does it matter which method we use?

Clinical Significance Methods: A Comparison of Statistical Techniques

Assessing Clinical Significance: Proposed Extensions to Method

Validity of clinically significant change classifications yielded by Jacobson-Truax and Hageman-Arrindell methods

Using clinical significance in psychotherapy outcome research: The need for a common procedure and validity data

An Introduction to Clinical Significance: An Alternative Index of Intervention Effect for Group Experimental Designs

Clinical significance: a statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research.

clinicalsignificance: Clinical Significance Analyses of Intervention Studies in R

Systematic Review of Measures of Clinical Significance Employed in Randomized Controlled Trials of Drugs for Dementia

Distinguishing Clinical from Statistical Significances in Contemporary Comparative Effectiveness Research

Can testing clinical significance reduce false positive rates in randomized controlled trials? A snap review

The Importance of the Principle of Clinical Significance—Defining Significant to Whom and for What Purpose: A Response to Tingey, Lambert, Burlingame, and Hansen

Towards a major methodological shift in depression research by assessing continuous scores of recurrence of illness, lifetime and current suicidal behaviors and phenome features

Alternatives to the P value: connotations of significance

How effective are cognitive and behavioral treatments for obsessive–compulsive disorder? A clinical significance analysis

Brain magnetic resonance imaging outperforms clinical severity ratings in the prediction of treatment outcomes in major depressive disorder

Clinical importance in Alzheimer's disease: effects of anchor agreement and disease severity

Establishing Clinically Meaningful Change on Outcome Assessments Frequently Used in Trials of Mild Cognitive Impairment Due to Alzheimer’s Disease

Have Treatment Studies of Depression Become Even Less Generalizable? Applying the Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria in Placebo-Controlled Antidepressant Efficacy Trials Published over 20 Years to a Clinical Sample

Clinician's Approach to Advanced Statistical Methods: Win Ratios, Restricted Mean Survival Time, Responder Analyses, and Standardized Mean Differences