ArticleDigital health
Development of a machine learning-based depression risk prediction model for middle-aged and elderly Chinese heart disease patients: Evidence from CHARLS data.
Article in Digital health. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Heart disease is a leading cause of death and disability among middle-aged and elderly populations. Depression is a common comorbidity that impairs prognosis and quality of life. This study aimed to develop a machine learning (ML)-based depression risk prediction model based on China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study (CHARLS) data. Methods: A total of 947 middle-aged and elderly heart disease patients from CHARLS 2015 were included after applying missing data criteria. Missing values were filled using random forest (RF), and data were split 7:3 into training and validation cohorts. Variables selection in the training cohort using univariate analysis, Lasso regression, recursive feature elimination (RFE), and feature importance evaluation using RF and decision tree (DT). Variables appearing in at least three of these five methods were selected. Eleven ML models were constructed and evaluated by area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, F1 score, calibration curve and decision curve analysis. Five-fold cross-validation enhanced stability and SHapley Additive exPlanation (SHAP) values interpreted feature importance. Results: Fifty-eight variables were extracted. After multi-step variable selection within the training cohort, nine variables (address, grip-max, arthritis rheumatism, Hope, sleep time, pain, Retire, ADL, IADL) were initially identified. Among 11 ML models, the logistic regression (LR) algorithm demonstrated the best overall performance with an AUC of 0.792 in the validation cohort. A 4-variable LR model (pain, address, sleep time, and grip-max) was optimized, achieving a comparable AUC of 0.788. SHAP analysis confirmed pain as the most critical predictor (69.0% of depressed patients reported pain versus 26.9% of non-depressed patients). Rural residence (86.5% vs. 66.7%), shorter sleep time (median 5.25(4.00, 7.00) vs. 6.00(5.00, 8.00) hours), and lower grip-max (24.50(20.00, 30.00) vs. 27.00(22.50, 33.40) increased depression risk. A user-friendly web-based calculator was developed for clinical applications. Conclusions: The simplified LR model exhibits robust predictive performance and clinical applicability for assessing high depression risk in middle-aged and elderly patients with heart disease.
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.