ArticleDepression and anxiety2024
Predicting Depression, Anxiety, and Their Comorbidity among Patients with Breast Cancer in China Using Machine Learning: A Multisite Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Depression and anxiety, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Diagnostic Prediction Models for Depression in Patients With Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical nursing · 2026Pooled it
- Differentiating Radiotherapy-Specific Distress From General Cancer Distress: Natural Language Processing Analysis of Patient Narratives.JMIR formative research · 2026Observational
- An explainable machine learning model for predicting depressive symptoms among Chinese older adults with chronic diseases.BMC psychiatry · 2026Article
- Psychological distress in Saudi prostate cancer patients: exploring prevalence and sociodemographic influences.BMC psychology · 2025Article
- An interpretable machine learning model for predicting depression in middle-aged and elderly cancer patients in China: a study based on the CHARLS cohort.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
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
Depression and anxiety are highly prevalent among patients with breast cancer. We tested the capacity of personal resources (psychological resilience, social support, and process of recovery) for predicting depression, anxiety, and comorbid depression and anxiety (CDA) among such patients using machine learning (ML). We conducted a cross-sectional survey in Liaoning Province, China, including questions about demographics, COVID-19's impact, and personal resources (707 valid responses). In the training set, we used Lasso logistic regression to establish personal resource models. Subsequently, we used six ML methods and a tenfold cross-validation strategy to establish models combining personal resources, demographics, and COVID-19 impacts. Findings indicate that in total, 21.9%, 35.1%, and 14.7% of participants showed depression, anxiety, and CDA, respectively. Loneliness, vitality, mental health, bodily pain, and self-control predicted depression, anxiety, and CDA. Furthermore, general health predicted depression, and physical function predicted anxiety. Demographic and COVID-19 models were far less predictive than personal resource models (0.505-0.629 vs. 0.826-0.869). Among combined models, the support vector machine model achieved the best prediction (AUC: 0.832-0.873), which was slightly better than the personal resource models. Personal resources features with ML and personal resources can help predict depression, anxiety, and CDA in patients with breast cancer. Accordingly, interventions should target loneliness, bodily pain, vitality, mental health, and self-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.