ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Predicting Depression in Community Dwellers Using a Machine Learning Algorithm.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond classification metrics: a psychometric-aware benchmark for data augmentation in imbalanced student mental health surveys.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Explainable Machine Learning Models for Clinical Depression Detection.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Prospective prediction of first onset of major depressive disorder in midlife using machine learning.Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology · 2025Article
- Association of risk factors with mental illness in a rural community: insights from machine learning models.BJPsych open · 2025Article
- Identifying major depressive disorder among US adults living alone using stacked ensemble machine learning algorithms.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- A risk model to predict the mental health of older people in Chinese communities based on machine learning.Annals of translational medicine · 2023Article
- Scoping Review on the Multimodal Classification of Depression and Experimental Study on Existing Multimodal Models.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Depression is one of the leading causes of disability worldwide. Given the socioeconomic burden of depression, appropriate depression screening for community dwellers is necessary. We used data from the 2014 and 2016 Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys. The 2014 dataset was used as a training set, whereas the 2016 dataset was used as the hold-out test set. The synthetic minority oversampling technique (SMOTE) was used to control for class imbalances between the depression and non-depression groups in the 2014 dataset. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) was used for feature reduction and classifiers in the final model. Data obtained from 9488 participants were used for the machine learning process. The depression group had poorer socioeconomic, health, functional, and biological measures than the non-depression group. From the initial 37 variables, 13 were selected using LASSO. All performance measures were calculated based on the raw 2016 dataset without the SMOTE. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and overall accuracy in the hold-out test set were 0.903 and 0.828, respectively. Perceived stress had the strongest influence on the classifying model for depression. LASSO can be practically applied for depression screening of community dwellers with a few variables. Future studies are needed to develop a more efficient and accurate classification model for depression.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.