ArticleBMC public health2026
Application of intersectionality framework and area-level indicators in machine learning analysis of depression disparities in all of us research program data.
Article in BMC public health, 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
- Update of
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectiveDepression is a complex mental health disorder influenced by various social determinants of health (SDOH) at individual and community levels. Area-level indicators and the intersectionality framework, which considers overlapping personal identities, are used in this paper to get a nuanced picture of depression disparities.
methodsThis cross-sectional study uses electronic health records data from the All of Us research network. Our study cohort includes 33,994 individuals who completed the SDOH surveys in All of Us and had at least one inpatient visit, with 31.7% diagnosed with depression between 2020 and 2025. We used depression diagnosis as an outcome, while independent variables include area-level variables from US Religious Census (religious adherents, %), American Community Survey response (birthrates by living arrangement), and All of Us (median area income and deprivation index); individual-level variables from All of Us surveys: age group, income, gender, sexual orientation, race/ethnicity, and others. We also added the interactions of the individual-level variables with each other and with area-level variables. The association between depression and the variables is reported by fitting the mixed effects logistic regression model on the subset of variables identified by the LASSO method with 3-digit ZIP code as a random effect.
resultsProtective factors included male sex at birth among straight (OR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.59–0.86) and non-binary (OR 0.42, 95% CI: 0.24–0.75) individuals, older adults with active military service (OR 0.64, 95% CI: 0.53–0.77) or health insurance (OR 0.80, 95% CI: 0.72–0.88), and younger adults with 1–2 children (OR 0.72, 95% CI: 0.60–0.86). Risk factors were strongest for inability to work (OR 2.01, 95% CI: 1.76–2.31), further impacted by medium per capita income (OR 1.39, 95% CI: 1.13–1.70). Housing concerns (OR 1.24, 95% CI: 1.09–1.41), frequent disrespect (OR 1.41, 95% CI: 1.17–1.69), and high area deprivation in older adults (OR 1.31, 95% CI: 1.12–1.53) increased risk. Other intersectional risks included non-binary identity in older adults (OR 5.14, 95% CI: 1.94–13.62), non-binary individuals born outside the USA (OR 10.23, 95% CI: 2.07–50.48), women with children (OR 1.39, 95% CI: 1.25–1.55), and Hispanic active-duty members (OR 1.90, 95% CI: 1.32–2.74). DISCUSSION/
conclusionOur findings, while being limited by 3-digit ZIP code aggregation that might have obscured some area-level effects, suggest that clinical and public health strategies for depression prevention and intervention should account for overlapping identities while incorporating place-aware approaches.
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.