ArticleScientific reports2026
Predictive factors of Black American emerging adults' psychological flourishing: a random forest analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Flourishing reflects positive psychosocial functioning and well-being. In this study, recent psychological distress was indexed using the CDC Healthy Days mental health item (mentally unhealthy days), reverse-coded as good mental health days. Emerging adulthood (18–29) is pivotal for mental health, yet robust predictors of flourishing among Black American emerging adults are understudied. We analyzed data from 513 participants (Mage = 23.6, SD = 3.35) using a 1,000-tree Random Forest with SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP). Performance was stable using out-of-bag (OOB) internal validation (OOB R2 = 0.267; test R2 = 0.245; RMSE = 1.044). JHAC was the dominant predictor, followed by good mental health days and good physical health days; discrimination and sleep showed smaller contributions, and substance use contributed least. Models included demographic covariates (age, education, religion, marital status, employment, female, parenting status, and having children). SHAP interaction values suggested conditional effects involving JHAC, including a pattern consistent with buffering in the association between current discrimination and flourishing. Methodologically, random forest and SHAP yielded transparent, individual-level explanations, revealing nonlinearities and interactions without pre-specification.
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.