ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2023
Evaluation of nutritional status and clinical depression classification using an explainable machine learning method.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Machine Learning in Predicting Child Malnutrition: A Meta-Analysis of Demographic and Health Surveys Data.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Pooled it
- Nutritional Impairment and Quality of Life Trajectories Among Older Adults With Advanced Cancer.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2025Trial
- Association between multimorbidity and childhood socioeconomic status with depressive symptoms among middle-aged and older adults in rural western China.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Enhancing Diagnostic Accuracy of Neurological Disorders Through Feature-Driven Multi-Class Classification with Machine Learning.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Explainable AI and transformer models: Unraveling the nutritional influences on Alzheimer's disease mortality.Smart health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2024Article
- Global, Regional, and National Epidemiology of Depression in Working-Age Individuals, 1990-2019.Depression and anxiety · 2024Article
- Comparative effectiveness of explainable machine learning approaches for extrauterine growth restriction classification in preterm infants using longitudinal data.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Depression is a prevalent disorder worldwide, with potentially severe implications. It contributes significantly to an increased risk of diseases associated with multiple risk factors. Early accurate diagnosis of depressive symptoms is a critical first step toward management, intervention, and prevention. Various nutritional and dietary compounds have been suggested to be involved in the onset, maintenance, and severity of depressive disorders. Despite the challenges to better understanding the association between nutritional risk factors and the occurrence of depression, assessing the interplay of these markers through supervised machine learning remains to be fully explored. Methods: This study aimed to determine the ability of machine learning-based decision support methods to identify the presence of depression using publicly available health data from the Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Two exploration techniques, namely, uniform manifold approximation and projection and Pearson correlation, were performed for explanatory analysis among datasets. A grid search optimization with cross-validation was performed to fine-tune the models for classifying depression with the highest accuracy. Several performance measures, including accuracy, precision, recall, F1 score, confusion matrix, areas under the precision-recall and receiver operating characteristic curves, and calibration plot, were used to compare classifier performances. We further investigated the importance of the features provided: visualized interpretation using ELI5, partial dependence plots, and local interpretable using model-agnostic explanations and Shapley additive explanation for the prediction at both the population and individual levels. Results: The best model achieved an accuracy of 86.18% for XGBoost and an area under the curve of 84.96% for the random forest model in original dataset and the XGBoost algorithm with an accuracy of 86.02% and an area under the curve of 85.34% in the quantile-based dataset. The explainable results revealed a complementary observation of the relative changes in feature values, and, thus, the importance of emergent depression risks could be identified. Discussion: The strength of our approach is the large sample size used for training with a fine-tuned model. The machine learning-based analysis showed that the hyper-tuned model has empirically higher accuracy in classifying patients with depressive disorder, as evidenced by the set of interpretable experiments, and can be an effective solution for disease control.
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.