ArticleFrontiers in public health2026
Development and validation of a machine learning model for predicting occupational stress among primary and secondary school teachers.
Article in Frontiers in 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To address the limitations of traditional linear tools in predicting teacher occupational stress, this study aimed to develop and validate machine learning models using easily obtainable, self-reported data. Method: A cross-sectional study of 2,832 in-service teachers in Lanzhou, China, was conducted. The presence of occupational stress, defined by the Core Occupational Stress Scale, was modeled using sociodemographic, work-related, and lifestyle factors. The dataset was partitioned into training (80%) and validation (20%) sets to compare six machine learning models: Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), Light Gradient Boosting Machine (LightGBM), a Backpropagation Neural Network, Elastic Net, Logistic Regression, and a Support Vector Machine. Model performance was evaluated using the Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve, accuracy, F1-score, and Decision Curve Analysis. The optimal model was interpreted using the SHapley Additive exPlanations method. Results: The prevalence of occupational stress was 33.3%. On the validation set, the Extreme Gradient Boosting model demonstrated the best performance, with an Area Under the Curve of 0.620, an accuracy of 0.603, and an F1-score of 0.682. Decision Curve Analysis confirmed this model provided the highest net benefit. The LightGBM and Neural Network models exhibited significant overfitting. SHapley Additive exPlanations analysis identified weekly exercise time, sex, and age as the most influential predictors. A user-friendly, web-based tool was developed from the final model. Conclusion: Machine learning, particularly the Extreme Gradient Boosting algorithm, can effectively predict occupational stress in teachers. This approach offers a promising tool for early identification, enabling targeted interventions.
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.