ArticleArchives of women's mental health2026
Interpretable prediction of anxiety symptoms during pregnancy via machine learning and SHAP.
Article in Archives of women's mental 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposePerinatal anxiety severely impacts maternal and infant health, yet efficient screening remains a challenge. This study aims to create a clinically interpretable screening framework by employing a machine learning (ML) model explained via Shapley additive explanations (SHAP).
methodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted between November 2022 and August 2023 at a tertiary teaching hospital in Guangzhou, China. We assessed pregnant women for prenatal anxiety symptoms via the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7). Four ML models—random forest (RF), support vector machine (SVM), extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), and k-nearest neighbor (KNN)—were trained and evaluated via 10-fold cross-validation with a 7:3 train‒test split. Model performance was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), and SHAP values were used to interpret feature contributions.
resultsWe screened 3141 participants via the GAD-7 and identified 318 with prenatal anxiety symptoms, yielding an incidence of 10.1%. The variables most strongly associated with anxiety were selected from 30 candidate variables by using the Boruta algorithm. XGBoost achieved the highest discriminative performance (AUC = 0.712), slightly outperforming RF (AUC = 0.711) and SVM (AUC = 0.633). The KNN model showed near-random performance (AUC = 0.509). SHAP analysis identified sleep quality, premenstrual tension, age, personality, spousal and mother‑daughter‑in‑law relationship quality, occupation, education, dietary habits, and stressful life events as key factors associated with antenatal anxiety symptoms.
conclusionsThe XGBoost model demonstrated acceptable accuracy for identifying antenatal anxiety symptoms. SHAP-based interpretability helps highlight high-impact psychosocial and lifestyle factors, offering a potential tool for early identification and prevention strategies in obstetric care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41910783What 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.