ArticleScientific reports2026
Heterogeneity of depression and suicidal ideation among college students in Eastern China: a latent profile analysis and machine learning approach.
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
Abstract
To investigate the heterogeneity of depression and suicidal ideation among Chinese college students and to examine the roles of family and individual psychological factors in differentiating risk profile. A total of 4,368 college students completed measures of depression, suicidal ideation, parental rejection, parent-child relationship, psychological resilience, and self-control. Latent profile analysis (LPA) was applied to identify distinct subgroups based on depression and suicidal ideation. Multinomial logistic regression was conducted to examine factors associated with profile membership, controlling for demographic variables. In addition, eleven machine learning models were compared to evaluate predictive performance and explore the relative importance of risk factors. LPA identified three distinct profiles: a low-risk group (71.09%), a moderate-risk group (23.83%), and a high-risk group (5.08%). Multinomial logistic regression indicated that higher parental rejection significantly increased the likelihood of belonging to higher-risk profiles, whereas stronger parent-child relationships, greater psychological resilience, and higher self-control served as protective factors. Notably, parent-child relationship primarily differentiated low- and moderate-risk groups, while psychological resilience and self-control played a more prominent role in distinguishing moderate-risk and high-risk profiles. Among the machine learning models, CatBoost demonstrated the best overall predictive performance, and feature importance analysis consistently identified parental rejection as the strongest predictor, followed by psychological resilience and self-control. Depression and suicidal ideation among Chinese college students exhibit substantial heterogeneity. Family-related risk, particularly parental rejection, and individual psychological resources jointly shape risk profiles, with their relative influence varying across severity levels. Integrating person-centered analysis with machine learning offers a robust framework for identifying high-risk subgroups and informing targeted prevention and intervention strategies.
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.