Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Brain functional connectivity and anatomical features as predictors of cognitive behavioral therapy outcome for anxiety in youths
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Brain functional connectivity and anatomical features as predictors of cognitive behavioral therapy outcome for anxiety in youths
Do you wish to request the book?
Brain functional connectivity and anatomical features as predictors of cognitive behavioral therapy outcome for anxiety in youths
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Brain functional connectivity and anatomical features as predictors of cognitive behavioral therapy outcome for anxiety in youths
2025
Overview
Because pediatric anxiety disorders precede the onset of many other problems, successful prediction of response to the first-line treatment, cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), could have a major impact. This study evaluates whether structural and resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging can predict post-CBT anxiety symptoms.
Two datasets were studied: (A) one consisted of
= 54 subjects with an anxiety diagnosis, who received 12 weeks of CBT, and (B) one consisted of
= 15 subjects treated for 8 weeks. Connectome predictive modeling (CPM) was used to predict treatment response, as assessed with the PARS. The main analysis included network edges positively correlated with treatment outcome and age, sex, and baseline anxiety severity as predictors. Results from alternative models and analyses are also presented. Model assessments utilized 1000 bootstraps, resulting in a 95% CI for
,
, and mean absolute error (MAE).
The main model showed a MAE of approximately 3.5 (95% CI: [3.1-3.8]) points, an
of 0.08 [-0.14-0.26], and an
of 0.38 [0.24-0.511]. When testing this model in the left-out sample (B), the results were similar, with an MAE of 3.4 [2.8-4.7],
-0.65 [-2.29-0.16], and
of 0.4 [0.24-0.54]. The anatomical metrics showed a similar pattern, where models rendered overall low
.
The analysis showed that models based on earlier promising results failed to predict clinical outcomes. Despite the small sample size, this study does not support the extensive use of CPM to predict outcomes in pediatric anxiety.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press
Subject
/ Adults
/ Anatomy
/ Anxiety
/ Anxiety Disorders - diagnostic imaging
/ Anxiety Disorders - physiopathology
/ Brain
/ Child
/ Cognitive behavioral therapy
/ Cognitive Behavioral Therapy - methods
/ Cognitive-behavioral factors
/ Coping
/ Datasets
/ Female
/ Functional magnetic resonance imaging
/ Generalized anxiety disorder
/ Humans
/ Male
/ Original
/ Resting
