ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2025
Predicting generalized anxiety disorder among Chinese depressed adolescents: an explainable machine learning approach.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
backgroundThe co-occurrence of depression and anxiety in adolescents is associated with a greater risk than the presence of depressive symptoms alone. Predicting anxiety disorders among depressed adolescents is critical for interventions and therapeutic tools.
methodsWe recruited 2316 depressed adolescents through the Chinese Adolescent Depression Cohort (CADC) and collected 34 predictive factors for model construction. The Light Gradient Boosting Machine (LightGBM) prediction model and Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) algorithm were implemented for in-depth interpretation of the predictive importance of different factors. Furthermore, chi-square automatic interaction detection (CHAID) and ordinal logistic regression were used to explore the factor interactions and validate the importance of the SHAP value-based factors, respectively.
resultsNine key risk factors were identified. In addition to depressive severity, rumination, perceived stress, sleep quality, alexithymia, peer victimization, academic stress level, emotion-focused coping, and parental overprotect were recognized as key risk factors for the onset of anxiety. Resilience was recognized as a protective factor. Interaction analysis captured critical interactions between depression and six other risk factors in relation to different levels of anxiety risks. Interactions between the protective effect of resilience and four risk factors were also analyzed. High-risk subgroups and low-risk groups for different levels of anxiety were identified through the CHAID decision tree. The high-risk subgroups for severe anxiety include (1) adolescents with severe depression symptoms, (2) with moderate depression symptoms and high rumination, and (3) with severe depression symptoms and high alexithymia. The low-risk subgroups are (1) adolescents with low depression and rumination, (2) with low depression, low alexithymia, and more parental care, (3) with low depression, moderate rumination, and moderate academic stress.
conclusionsUtilizing an explainable machine learning approach enables us to identify the risk and protective factors for anxiety disorders among depressed adolescents. The SHAP analysis results suggest that depression severity was the most important predictor for co-morbid anxiety. CHAID decision tree further identified risk subgroups. These findings suggest that clinical workers take into consideration the above risk and protective factors as well as their interactions to develop appropriate therapies for the prevention of comorbid anxiety with 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.