Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41505715›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2026

AI for Detecting and Predicting Postpartum Depression: Scoping Review.

Mais Alkhateeb, Ajisha Nayeem, Arfan Ahmed, Mohammed Alsahli, Javaid Sheikh, Alaa Abd-Alrazaq

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Mental Health and Wellbeing of Rohingya Refugees: A Scoping Review.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2026
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Mais AlkhateebCollege of Education and Art, Lusail University, Doha, Qatar, +974440119502.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0006-7644-8604
Ajisha NayeemAI Center for Precision Health, Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar, Doha, Qatar.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2407-6221
Arfan AhmedAI Center for Precision Health, Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar, Doha, Qatar.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4025-5767
Mohammed AlsahliHealth Informatics Department, College of Health Science, Saudi Electronic University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6504-9759
Javaid SheikhAI Center for Precision Health, Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar, Doha, Qatar.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5762-4186
Alaa Abd-AlrazaqAI Center for Precision Health, Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar, Doha, Qatar.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7695-4626

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Postpartum depression (PPD) affects up to 20% of mothers globally. Early detection is vital for better outcomes, yet screening lacks scalability and predictive power. Artificial intelligence (AI)-through machine learning, deep learning, and natural language processing-enhances the early identification of mothers at risk with greater accuracy. Objective: This study aims to systematically map the existing literature on AI-based methods for detecting and predicting PPD. Methods: This scoping review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. We included empirical studies that applied AI techniques to detect or predict PPD and were published in peer-reviewed journals, conference proceedings, or dissertations. Studies were excluded if they were nonempirical (eg, reviews, editorials, and abstracts), not published in English, focused on general perinatal mental health without a specific emphasis on PPD, or used AI solely for monitoring or treatment rather than prediction or detection. We systematically searched 8 databases-MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Scopus, IEEE Xplore, ACM Digital Library, and Google Scholar-from inception through February 28, 2025. The search strategy was supplemented by backward and forward reference screening and biweekly alerts to capture newly published studies. Two independent (M [Alkhateeb] and A [Nayeem])reviewers (M [Alkhateeb] and A [Nayeem]) screened the retrieved studies, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer (AA [Alrazaq]). Data were extracted by 2 independent reviewers using a standardized extraction form capturing study characteristics, AI model types, data sources, features, preprocessing, validation strategies, and performance metrics. A formal risk-of-bias assessment was not performed due to the scoping nature of the review. All extracted data were synthesized narratively. Results: Out of 503 retrieved studies, 65 met the inclusion criteria. The United States contributed the largest proportion of studies (18/65, 27.7%). The highest number of publications occurred in 2024 (17/65, 26%). Most included studies were journal articles (46/65, 71%). Short-term postpartum outcomes (≤12 weeks) were most frequently assessed (20/65, 30.8%). Most included studies (52/65, 80%) applied AI models for predicting PPD, while 14 of 65 (22%) studies used them for detection. Sociodemographic data were most frequently used (49/65, 75.4%), followed by psychological data (44/65, 68%) and obstetric data (35/65, 55%). Data preprocessing mostly relied on basic scaling (51/65, 79%) and some missing data imputation (29/65, 44.6%). Machine learning dominated (57/65, 87.7%), especially random forest, support vector machines, and logistic regression. Internal validation (k-fold, hold-out) was standard, while external validation was scarce. Ensemble-based boosting models consistently demonstrated superior performance across key metrics, highlighting their potential for accurate and scalable PPD prediction. Current studies suffer from limited sample sizes, geographic bias, lack of standardized feature sets, minimal external validation, and inconsistent reporting of comprehensive model metrics. Conclusions: This scoping review analyzes 65 studies on AI in PPD, highlighting dominant use of classical machine learning, limited deep learning adoption, underuse of advanced preprocessing, inconsistent validation, and reliance on structured, unimodal data-mainly sociodemographic, clinical, and obstetric features.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceDepression, PostpartumFemaleHumansMachine LearningPregnancyartificial intelligencecomputer-aided diagnosisdeep learningmachine learningmaternal mental healthnatural language processingperinatal depressionpostpartum depressionprediction models

Identifiers

PMID41505715
PMCPMC12782538

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.