Scholarlink

Abstract <p>While a growing number of studies have highlighted the relevance of core and bridge symptoms as potential intervention targets by following the network approach&#xa0;to&#xa0; psychopathology, their findings have remained primarily descriptive or retrospective. To date, no study has prospectively tested whether interventions tailored to person-specific symptom networks can improve clinical outcomes compared to standard interventions. To address this gap, we conducted an exploratory investigation to examine whether a network-driven, person-specific sequencing of modules yields signals of added benefit compared with a standardized sequence. Accordingly, this proof-of-concept pilot randomized controlled trial recruited participants aged 18–29 years with depressive symptoms, and the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview was administered in person to screen for psychiatric conditions. The study compared a digital intervention program, consisting of up to 9 sessions plus one psychoeducation session, sequenced according to core symptoms identified through network analysis using 10-day ecological momentary assessment (EMA) collected beforehand, with a&#xa0;standardized&#xa0;fixed-sequence&#xa0;intervention. Depressive symptoms were measured using the, which includes&#xa0;one item assessing thoughts of self-harm or suicide, at post-intervention, and at 1- and 3-months follow-up. In total, 62 participants were randomly assigned to one of two intervention groups in a 1:1 ratio, with 31 participants in each group. An intent-to-treat analysis revealed significant improvements in depressive symptoms over time in both groups (p<sub>fdr</sub> &lt; 0.01). Both groups showed substantial reductions in depression scores from baseline to post-intervention, with large effect sizes (d = 1.24 for the personalized group and d = 1.15 for the standardized group). These improvements were maintained at the 1-month follow-up (d = 0.86 for the personalized group and d = 1.09 for the standardized group) and the 3-month follow-up (d = 1.05 for the personalized group and d = 0.89 for the standardized group). However, the group × time interaction was near zero and imprecisely estimated (β = −0.01, 95% CI − 0.96–0.94; <i>p</i> = 0.987), indicating that, in this pilot, between-arm differences were small and statistically non-significant. Non-significant results are interpreted as inconclusive rather than evidencing equivalence. These findings underscore the need for further trials to identify the specific conditions under which personalized, network-informed approaches might yield advantages over standard interventions.</p> Trial registration <p>The study was pre-registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2300078568).</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Effectiveness of network analysis–driven personalized digital interventions versus standard intervention for depression: a proof-of-concept pilot randomized controlled trial

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年2月6日

查看全文
  • Diyang Qu,
  • Liying Che,
  • Peiyu Chen,
  • Anni Zhu,
  • Tongtong Cai,
  • Zhijun Wu,
  • Weijia Li,
  • Junkang Lin,
  • Bowen Liu,
  • Quan Zhang,
  • Zhen Zhang,
  • Zaixu Cui,
  • Runsen Chen

摘要

Abstract

While a growing number of studies have highlighted the relevance of core and bridge symptoms as potential intervention targets by following the network approach to  psychopathology, their findings have remained primarily descriptive or retrospective. To date, no study has prospectively tested whether interventions tailored to person-specific symptom networks can improve clinical outcomes compared to standard interventions. To address this gap, we conducted an exploratory investigation to examine whether a network-driven, person-specific sequencing of modules yields signals of added benefit compared with a standardized sequence. Accordingly, this proof-of-concept pilot randomized controlled trial recruited participants aged 18–29 years with depressive symptoms, and the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview was administered in person to screen for psychiatric conditions. The study compared a digital intervention program, consisting of up to 9 sessions plus one psychoeducation session, sequenced according to core symptoms identified through network analysis using 10-day ecological momentary assessment (EMA) collected beforehand, with a standardized fixed-sequence intervention. Depressive symptoms were measured using the, which includes one item assessing thoughts of self-harm or suicide, at post-intervention, and at 1- and 3-months follow-up. In total, 62 participants were randomly assigned to one of two intervention groups in a 1:1 ratio, with 31 participants in each group. An intent-to-treat analysis revealed significant improvements in depressive symptoms over time in both groups (pfdr < 0.01). Both groups showed substantial reductions in depression scores from baseline to post-intervention, with large effect sizes (d = 1.24 for the personalized group and d = 1.15 for the standardized group). These improvements were maintained at the 1-month follow-up (d = 0.86 for the personalized group and d = 1.09 for the standardized group) and the 3-month follow-up (d = 1.05 for the personalized group and d = 0.89 for the standardized group). However, the group × time interaction was near zero and imprecisely estimated (β = −0.01, 95% CI − 0.96–0.94; p = 0.987), indicating that, in this pilot, between-arm differences were small and statistically non-significant. Non-significant results are interpreted as inconclusive rather than evidencing equivalence. These findings underscore the need for further trials to identify the specific conditions under which personalized, network-informed approaches might yield advantages over standard interventions.

Trial registration

The study was pre-registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2300078568).