Advancing Predictive Modeling in Behavioral Health: A Comparative Evaluation of Gradient-Boosted Bootstrap Model, Random Forest, and Logistic Regression Approaches to Treatment Completion

Advancing Predictive Modeling in Behavioral Health: A Comparative Evaluation of Gradient-Boosted Bootstrap Model, Random Forest, and Logistic Regression Approaches to Treatment Completion | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Advancing Predictive Modeling in Behavioral Health: A Comparative Evaluation of Gradient-Boosted Bootstrap Model, Random Forest, and Logistic Regression Approaches to Treatment Completion Graham Zulu This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-9109247/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Treatment completion in substance use disorder (SUD) programs is a strong predictor of positive long-term health outcomes, yet many clients disengage prematurely. Traditional statistical models often struggle to account for the complex, non-linear factors influencing treatment retention. This evaluation compares the predictive performance and probability calibration of three models (Logistic Regression, Random Forest, and a novel Gradient-Boosted Bootstrap Model (GBBM)) to determine the most effective approach for forecasting treatment completion. Data from 1,158 adults enrolled in a Colorado-based SUD treatment program were analyzed. Models were trained using an 80/20 stratified split and evaluated using metrics such as accuracy, F1-score, recall, ROC AUC, and Brier score. A dual-level bootstrap framework was used to assess performance stability, with a special focus on correctly identifying treatment completers (Class 1), a clinically significant minority. GBBM outperformed both traditional and ensemble baselines in several areas, achieving the highest recall (0.855), strongest F1-score (0.837), and lowest Brier score (0.076). While logistic regression demonstrated more stable performance across resamples, it lagged slightly in sensitivity and calibration. Random Forest showed the weakest overall performance, especially in identifying treatment completers. The GBBM offered a favorable trade-off between predictive accuracy and probabilistic calibration, particularly in detecting clients who complete treatment. These findings emphasize the value of ensemble-based machine learning in behavioral health applications while emphasizing the continued relevance of interpretable models like logistic regression. Applied Statistics substance use disorder treatment completion machine learning ensemble models gradient boosting probability calibration Full Text Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-9109247","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":605366471,"identity":"6b61cfa9-2d71-4306-89a3-df32670d61d6","order_by":0,"name":"Graham Zulu","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0906-7060","institution":"University of Denver","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Graham","middleName":"","lastName":"Zulu","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-03-13 02:05:02","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":true,"vertebrateSubjects":false,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":false,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":true,"humanSubjectConsent":true,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9109247/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9109247/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":104828343,"identity":"0a2ae2d1-df52-4649-855b-adbe53279caf","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-03-17 15:56:05","extension":"pdf","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":584846,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"GBBMLRRF.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9109247/v1_covered_49f75720-5dd1-4581-a673-480493ccba3d.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"The authors declare no competing interests.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAdvancing Predictive Modeling in Behavioral Health: A Comparative Evaluation of Gradient-Boosted Bootstrap Model, Random Forest, and Logistic Regression Approaches to Treatment Completion\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":false,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"University of Denver","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":true,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":true,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"substance use disorder, treatment completion, machine learning, ensemble models, gradient boosting, probability calibration","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9109247/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9109247/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eTreatment completion in substance use disorder (SUD) programs is a strong predictor of positive long-term health outcomes, yet many clients disengage prematurely. Traditional statistical models often struggle to account for the complex, non-linear factors influencing treatment retention. This evaluation compares the predictive performance and probability calibration of three models (Logistic Regression, Random Forest, and a novel Gradient-Boosted Bootstrap Model (GBBM)) to determine the most effective approach for forecasting treatment completion. Data from 1,158 adults enrolled in a Colorado-based SUD treatment program were analyzed. Models were trained using an 80/20 stratified split and evaluated using metrics such as accuracy, F1-score, recall, ROC AUC, and Brier score. A dual-level bootstrap framework was used to assess performance stability, with a special focus on correctly identifying treatment completers (Class 1), a clinically significant minority. GBBM outperformed both traditional and ensemble baselines in several areas, achieving the highest recall (0.855), strongest F1-score (0.837), and lowest Brier score (0.076). While logistic regression demonstrated more stable performance across resamples, it lagged slightly in sensitivity and calibration. Random Forest showed the weakest overall performance, especially in identifying treatment completers. The GBBM offered a favorable trade-off between predictive accuracy and probabilistic calibration, particularly in detecting clients who complete treatment. These findings emphasize the value of ensemble-based machine learning in behavioral health applications while emphasizing the continued relevance of interpretable models like logistic regression.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Advancing Predictive Modeling in Behavioral Health: A Comparative Evaluation of Gradient-Boosted Bootstrap Model, Random Forest, and Logistic Regression Approaches to Treatment Completion","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-03-17 15:55:05","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9109247/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"a2d595c0-5aac-45f9-9654-99358fe6c43a","owner":[],"postedDate":"March 17th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":64426369,"name":"Applied Statistics"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-03-17T15:55:05+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-03-17 15:55:05","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-9109247","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-9109247","identity":"rs-9109247","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}