ArticleEntropy (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Mapping Heterogeneity in Psychological Risk Among University Students Using Explainable Machine Learning.
Article in Entropy (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In the post-pandemic era, student mental health challenges have emerged as a critical issue in higher education. However, conventional assessment approaches often treat at-risk populations as a monolithic entity, thereby limiting intervention effectiveness. This study proposes a novel computational framework that integrates explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) with unsupervised learning to decode the latent heterogeneity of psychological risk mechanisms. We developed a "predict-explain-discover" pipeline leveraging TreeSHAP and Gaussian Mixture Models to identify distinct risk subtypes based on a 2556-dimensional feature space encompassing lexical, linguistic, and affective indicators. Our approach identified three theoretically-grounded subtypes: academically-driven (28.46%), socio-emotional (43.85%), and internal regulatory (27.69%) risks. Sensitivity analysis using top-20 core features further validated the structural stability of these mechanisms, proving that the subtypes are anchored in the model's primary decision drivers rather than high-dimensional noise. The framework demonstrates how black-box classifiers can be transformed into diagnostic tools, bridging the gap between predictive accuracy and mechanistic understanding. Our findings align with the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) and establish a foundation for precision interventions targeting specific risk drivers. This work advances computational mental health research through methodological innovations in mechanism-based subtyping and practical strategies for personalized student support.
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.