Predicting involuntary hospitalization in psychiatry: A machine learning investigation.
Coercion
involuntary hospitalization
machine learning
predicting factor
Journal
European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists
ISSN: 1778-3585
Titre abrégé: Eur Psychiatry
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9111820
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 07 2021
08 07 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
9
7
2021
medline:
23
11
2021
entrez:
8
7
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Coercion in psychiatry is a controversial issue. Identifying its predictors and their interaction using traditional statistical methods is difficult, given the large number of variables involved. The purpose of this study was to use machine-learning (ML) models to identify socio-demographic, clinical and procedural characteristics that predict the use of compulsory admission on a large sample of psychiatric patients. We retrospectively analyzed the routinely collected data of all psychiatric admissions that occurred between 2013 and 2017 in the canton of Vaud, Switzerland (N = 25,584). The main predictors of involuntary hospitalization were identified using two ML algorithms: Classification and Regression Tree (CART) and Random Forests (RFs). Their predictive power was compared with that obtained through traditional logistic regression. Sensitivity analyses were also performed and missing data were imputed through multiple imputation using chain equations. The three models achieved similar predictive balanced accuracy, ranging between 68 and 72%. CART showed the lowest predictive power (68%) but the most parsimonious model, allowing to estimate the probability of being involuntarily admitted with only three checks: aggressive behaviors, who referred the patient to hospital and primary diagnosis. The results of CART and RFs on the imputed data were almost identical to those obtained on the original data, confirming the robustness of our models. Identifying predictors of coercion is essential to efficiently target the development of professional training, preventive strategies and alternative interventions. ML methodologies could offer new effective tools to achieve this goal, providing accurate but simple models that could be used in clinical practice.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Coercion in psychiatry is a controversial issue. Identifying its predictors and their interaction using traditional statistical methods is difficult, given the large number of variables involved. The purpose of this study was to use machine-learning (ML) models to identify socio-demographic, clinical and procedural characteristics that predict the use of compulsory admission on a large sample of psychiatric patients.
METHODS
We retrospectively analyzed the routinely collected data of all psychiatric admissions that occurred between 2013 and 2017 in the canton of Vaud, Switzerland (N = 25,584). The main predictors of involuntary hospitalization were identified using two ML algorithms: Classification and Regression Tree (CART) and Random Forests (RFs). Their predictive power was compared with that obtained through traditional logistic regression. Sensitivity analyses were also performed and missing data were imputed through multiple imputation using chain equations.
RESULTS
The three models achieved similar predictive balanced accuracy, ranging between 68 and 72%. CART showed the lowest predictive power (68%) but the most parsimonious model, allowing to estimate the probability of being involuntarily admitted with only three checks: aggressive behaviors, who referred the patient to hospital and primary diagnosis. The results of CART and RFs on the imputed data were almost identical to those obtained on the original data, confirming the robustness of our models.
CONCLUSIONS
Identifying predictors of coercion is essential to efficiently target the development of professional training, preventive strategies and alternative interventions. ML methodologies could offer new effective tools to achieve this goal, providing accurate but simple models that could be used in clinical practice.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34233774
doi: 10.1192/j.eurpsy.2021.2220
pii: S0924933821022203
pmc: PMC8316455
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e48Références
PLoS One. 2016 Aug 02;11(8):e0160360
pubmed: 27483015
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2019 Sep - Oct;66:101472
pubmed: 31706388
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Oct 25;14:500
pubmed: 25344295
Psychiatr Prax. 2015 Apr;42(3):133-9
pubmed: 24723039
Front Psychiatry. 2019 Mar 21;10:120
pubmed: 30949072
Lancet Psychiatry. 2019 Dec;6(12):1039-1053
pubmed: 31777340
Eur Psychiatry. 2011 May;26(4):244-51
pubmed: 21296560
BMC Psychiatry. 2019 Apr 29;19(1):127
pubmed: 31035963
Psychol Med. 2014 Apr;44(5):997-1004
pubmed: 23795603
Psychiatry Res. 2018 Jul;265:13-18
pubmed: 29680512
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2004 Oct;39(10):804-9
pubmed: 15669661
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2014 Feb;49(2):283-90
pubmed: 23863912
Eur Psychiatry. 2004 Apr;19(2):91-5
pubmed: 15051108
Psychiatr Q. 2017 Mar;88(1):1-7
pubmed: 26897657
Int J Ment Health Syst. 2018 Sep 22;12:51
pubmed: 30258490
Lancet Psychiatry. 2017 Aug;4(8):619-626
pubmed: 28647537
Clin Pract Epidemiol Ment Health. 2007 Dec 04;3:30
pubmed: 18053203
Br J Psychiatry. 2008 Jul;193(1):44-50
pubmed: 18700217
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2014 Oct;49(10):1619-29
pubmed: 24737189
Can J Psychiatry. 2001 Nov;46(9):841-6
pubmed: 11761636
PeerJ. 2019 Jul 19;7:e7339
pubmed: 31355058
Lancet Psychiatry. 2019 May;6(5):403-417
pubmed: 30954479
Praxis (Bern 1994). 2014 May 21;103(11):631-9
pubmed: 24846888
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2017 Aug;52(8):979-987
pubmed: 28255793
Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci. 2016 Feb;25(1):49-57
pubmed: 25487132
Expert Rev Neurother. 2014 Feb;14(2):131-41
pubmed: 24382132
Acta Biomed. 2018 Jul 18;89(6-S):17-28
pubmed: 30038200
Nord J Psychiatry. 2007;61(6):433-7
pubmed: 18236309
BMC Psychiatry. 2017 Oct 24;17(1):350
pubmed: 29065870
BMC Psychiatry. 2018 Dec 29;18(1):401
pubmed: 30594163
World Psychiatry. 2021 Jun;20(2):154-170
pubmed: 34002503
Issues Ment Health Nurs. 2009 Apr;30(4):214-26
pubmed: 19363726
Front Psychiatry. 2019 Jan 18;9:760
pubmed: 30713511
Tijdschr Psychiatr. 2013;55(1):45-55
pubmed: 23315696
Eur Psychiatry. 2004 Apr;19(2):67-71
pubmed: 15051104
Psychiatr Serv. 2008 Jan;59(1):63-71
pubmed: 18182541
Psychol Med. 2009 Mar;39(3):485-96
pubmed: 18578893
BMC Psychiatry. 2016 Aug 12;16:291
pubmed: 27520558
Psychiatr Q. 2013 Mar;84(1):73-80
pubmed: 22585110
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2012 Jul-Aug;35(4):317-26
pubmed: 22560406
BMC Health Serv Res. 2010 Apr 06;10:89
pubmed: 20370928
Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1993 Apr;87(4):231-6
pubmed: 8488742
Ann Behav Med. 2003 Dec;26(3):172-81
pubmed: 14644693
Psychiatry Res. 2011 Aug 30;189(1):10-20
pubmed: 21236497
Eur Psychiatry. 2011 May;26(4):201-7
pubmed: 20965119
Eur Psychiatry. 2019 Jun;59:70-76
pubmed: 31079010
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2002 Jul;37(7):341-5
pubmed: 12111027
Ann Gen Psychiatry. 2017 Jan 25;16:3
pubmed: 28174594
BMC Psychiatry. 2020 Aug 8;20(1):401
pubmed: 32770970
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2013 Mar-Apr;36(2):136-43
pubmed: 23395506
Br J Psychiatry. 2004 Feb;184:163-8
pubmed: 14754830
Front Psychiatry. 2020 May 13;11:415
pubmed: 32477188
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2001 Jul-Oct;24(4-5):399-410
pubmed: 11521417
Br J Psychiatry. 2000 Sep;177:196-200
pubmed: 11040877
Int J Soc Psychiatry. 2019 Nov;65(7-8):580-588
pubmed: 31379244
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Feb 10;14:64
pubmed: 24506810
Front Psychiatry. 2019 Aug 09;10:544
pubmed: 31447710
Br J Psychiatry. 2016 Aug;209(2):157-61
pubmed: 27284079
Front Psychiatry. 2018 Jun 12;9:258
pubmed: 29946273
Nord J Psychiatry. 2012 Jun;66(3):178-82
pubmed: 21936731
Nord J Psychiatry. 2015;69(8):637-42
pubmed: 26057660