ArticleScientific reports2025
Identifying prenatal risk factors of postpartum depression with machine learning.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A scoping review of the use of artificial intelligence as a psychological assessment tool.Translational psychiatry · 2026Article
- Perinatal depression management: A narrative review of guidelines and recommendations in chosen European countries.European journal of midwifery · 2026Review
- Exploration of the associations between violent and aggressive behaviors risk and NHHR, TyG in patients with schizophrenia: an SHAP interpretable machine learning prediction and FAERS pharmacovigilance analysis.Lipids in health and disease · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Postpartum depression (PPD), a common mental illness among mothers, can affect the well-being of both mothers and their children. Early intervention is essential but hindered by difficulties in identifying at-risk women, as it remains unclear how soon PPD can be predicted and which prenatal risk factors are most informative at each stage of pregnancy. We applied machine learning algorithms to (1) determine how early PPD can be predicted and (2) identify trimester-specific risk factors. The analysis leveraged data from 2865 mothers enrolled in the Brabant Study (Netherlands), including 233 psychological, biological, and social variables. A Lasso-regularized linear regression model trained on all trimesters performed best, identifying depressive symptoms during pregnancy, negative affectivity, neuroticism, body mass index, and history of mental health treatment as the most predictive risk factors. Although our predictive performance matched that of similar machine learning studies, high specificity but relatively low sensitivity indicates the model reliably excludes low-risk women but is less effective at detecting those who will develop PPD. Consistent performance across trimesters suggests low-risk status can be identified as early as 12 weeks. Clinicians could therefore use early-pregnancy data to rule out low-risk cases and allocate preventive resources more efficiently.
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.