AzTrials
AzTrials

Posttraumatic Stress DisorderCPPNCT06233968

Using Data Science To Center Patient Perspectives in Mechanism Discovery

An observational study of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and Complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, run by Cambridge Health Alliance at 1 site in United States.

Active, not recruiting

Under way, not looking for participants. Everyone needed has enrolled. The study is still running.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Including patient perspectives when developing new therapy interventions is crucial because it can help to understand response heterogeneity and promote engagement. Yet, analyzing patient interview data is difficult and time-consuming. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 to 75 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
How many people
33 participants
Where
1 siteUnited States
Study dates
19 Mar 2024to 31 Dec 2026
Phase
Observational
Are there results?
Not yet: the study is under way

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 to 75 years
  • All sexes
  • Healthy volunteers accepted
  • Adult, Older adult

Study population: Participants will be recruited from a community-based clinical service called Program For Alleviating and Resolving Trauma and Stress (PARTS) service within Cambridge Health Alliance (CHA) that offers a 16-week, live-online group therapy model based on Internal Family Systems.

Who may be able to join

  • Must be enrolled in the clinical service offering online PARTS group and approved and confirmed to start by the clinical team.
  • Have sufficient English fluency and literacy skills to understand the consent process, procedures and questionnaires and have the ability to provide written informed consent.
  • Have access to the internet and an electronic device with adequate data capacity; to complete questionnaires online and participate in two online video interviews.
  • Must be willing to complete online computerized assessments both at baseline and post-intervention; and participate in two, one-hour videotaped interviews one at baseline and one 2-4 weeks post-intervention.

Who cannot join

  • Inability to complete an informed consent assessment AND/OR inability to complete baseline study assessment procedures (due to cognitive deficit, non-proficiency in English literacy, or any other reason).
  • Expected medical hospitalization in 24 weeks from the date of enrollment.
  • Expected incarceration in 24 weeks from the date of enrollment.
  • Individuals who are pregnant with a due date within 24 weeks after study consent.
  • Insufficient internet connection to conduct online interviews or computerized assessments.

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

United States1 site
  • Cambridge Health Alliance

    Malden, Massachusetts, 02148

Other trials in United States

About this study

Official title: Using Data Science To Center Patient Perspectives In Psychological Mechanism Discovery and Intervention Development

Including patient perspectives when developing new therapy interventions is crucial because it can help to understand response heterogeneity and promote engagement. Yet, analyzing patient interview data is difficult and time-consuming. This study aims to explore the potential for natural language processing and deep learning to analyze patient interviews and identify potential ways in which therapy leads to psychological change. This study will recruit participants from an existing clinical service that offers a 16-week online group therapy model (and adjunct individual therapy sessions) called Program for Alleviating and Resolving Trauma and Stress (PARTS) based on a therapy called Internal Family Systems (IFS). The investigators will use a mixed methods approach, applying natural language processing and deep learning to develop models that identify potential mechanisms of change. These models will be based on patient perspectives of psychological change, as expressed in interviews, and be compared to models based on clinical measures.

Read the detailed description

Demand for cost-effective, novel, scalable trauma-focused interventions is high. Prevalence rates of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and Complex PTSD in US community mental health clinics are estimated to be as high as 50%. Yet response heterogeneity to PTSD interventions remains high, with non-response rates reaching 50-60% and dropout rates for traditional interventions (i.e., cognitive behavioral, exposure therapies) at 30-40%. Moreover, research populations in typical stepwise, efficacy-driven clinical research trials are often characterized by strict exclusion criteria and low representation from underrepresented communities. The homogeneous nature of efficacy-based research populations creates an incomplete picture, especially in public sector and community-based mental health facilities. Studies have suggested not only does this homogeneity limit effectiveness across diverse populations, but may contribute to exacerbating health disparities.

Engaging patient perspectives is crucial to research because it can provide insight into response heterogeneity and engagement, ultimately leading to an understanding of mechanisms and creating more patient-centered interventions. One way to center the patient's voice and increase the potential of identifying unique mechanisms of change for a novel therapy, is to use qualitative interviews because it directly accesses the lived experience and its context. Despite the potential benefits of utilizing qualitative data in stepwise randomized control trials, several obstacles persist, including resource constraints, the inability to quantify interactive elements, and concerns regarding the practical value of the gathered information. Innovative methods that reliably and rapidly extract value-laden, relevant themes, and discern non-verbal conversational elements may facilitate the integration of patient experience and inclusion of their perspectives in clinical intervention trials.

This single-arm study aims to evaluate the feasibility of using natural language processing (NLP) and deep learning to identify potential mechanisms of PTSD symptom change from patient interviews. The study will utilize ongoing cohorts from a clinical service that offers a 16-week, live-online group therapy model (and adjunct individual therapy sessions) called Program For Alleviating And Resolving Trauma and Stress (PARTS) that uses the IFS model. The investigators will use a convergent mixed methods approach applying machine learning and natural language processing to develop models that identify potential mechanisms of change.

Analysis: The investigators will use several different methods to develop our models including Latent Dirichlet Allocation, pre-trained language models, transfer learning (recurrent neural networks, generative adversarial network), and penalized regression-based models. These models will use data derived from patient perspectives of psychological change, as expressed in interviews, and will be compared to models derived from clinical measures. The study will use standard performance metrics and cross-validation scores to evaluate comparative performance of the models. As an exploratory aim, the study will evaluate the feasibility of using features derived from language processing models and clinical measures to predict individual therapy visits post-intervention. The exploratory data will also include structured clinical data, social determinants of health, and therapy-based utilization (dates, provider type, length).

Anticipated results: The development of two validated models: one derived from patient interview data and the other based on clinical measures to comprehensively identify mechanisms of change from group-based therapy models of IFS for PTSD.

Keywords
natural language processing, machine learning, Internal Family Systems
Medical subject headings
Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Similarity of topics and mechanism identification

    Similarity of topics obtained from interview data using language processing tools to those classified by human coders and identification of mechanisms from predictive models with language processing derived features.

    Measured: 24 weeks

Secondary outcomes (1)
  1. Comparable mechanism identification and performance

    Models using features derived from interview data will find comparable mechanisms to ones using clinical survey data and exhibit moderate predictive power.

    Measured: 24 weeks

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted31 Jan 2024
  2. Study start19 Mar 2024
  3. Primary completion5 May 2025
  4. Study completion31 Dec 2026 (estimated)

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Observational
Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrolment
33 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT06233968
Sponsor's protocol ID
13664
Acronym
CPP
Status last verified
Sep 2026
First submitted
23 Jan 2024
Last updated
21 Sep 2026
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No: Not planning to share IPD with other researchers

Publications

  • Spoont MR, Murdoch M, Hodges J, Nugent S. Treatment receipt by veterans after a PTSD diagnosis in PTSD, mental health, or general medical clinics. Psychiatr Serv. 2010 Jan;61(1):58-63. doi: 10.1176/ps.2010.61.1.58.

    PubMed 20044419
  • Schottenbauer MA, Glass CR, Arnkoff DB, Tendick V, Gray SH. Nonresponse and dropout rates in outcome studies on PTSD: review and methodological considerations. Psychiatry. 2008 Summer;71(2):134-68. doi: 10.1521/psyc.2008.71.2.134.

    PubMed 18573035
  • Adams-Campbell LL, Ahaghotu C, Gaskins M, Dawkins FW, Smoot D, Polk OD, Gooding R, DeWitty RL. Enrollment of African Americans onto clinical treatment trials: study design barriers. J Clin Oncol. 2004 Feb 15;22(4):730-4. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2004.03.160.

    PubMed 14966098
  • Erves JC, Mayo-Gamble TL, Malin-Fair A, Boyer A, Joosten Y, Vaughn YC, Sherden L, Luther P, Miller S, Wilkins CH. Needs, Priorities, and Recommendations for Engaging Underrepresented Populations in Clinical Research: A Community Perspective. J Community Health. 2017 Jun;42(3):472-480. doi: 10.1007/s10900-016-0279-2.

    PubMed 27812847

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

An observational study of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and Complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, run by Cambridge Health Alliance at 1 site in United States.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: under way, not looking for participants, as of the sponsor's last update on 21 Sep 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Similarity of topics and mechanism identification (time frame: 24 weeks). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT06233968, which also lists 4 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 21 Sep 2026; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 6 Nov 2026.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in