ArticleAlcohol, clinical & experimental research2026
Classification of Alcohol Use Disorder With Explainable AI.
Article in Alcohol, clinical & experimental research, 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe wide-ranging correlates (e.g., demographic, socioeconomic status [SES], brain, genetics) of alcohol use disorder (AUD) are typically characterized by small effects and studied in isolation. Novel multivariable nonlinear approaches may help characterize the multifaceted correlates of AUD and identify its strongest predictors.
methodHere, using Gradient Boosted Machines (GBMs), we classify AUD in the UK Biobank (N = 12,178) from features (n = 440) within the following 5 domains: (1) demographic (n = 12), (2) socioeconomic status (n = 18), (3) non-substance mental health (n = 55), (4) non-alcohol substance involvement (n = 6), and (5) biological features (n = 342). We use Explainable Artificial Intelligence (xAI) to characterize each respective feature's contribution to model performance and its heterogeneity, as well as the extent to which features from each domain collectively contribute to model performance.
resultsIn an out-of-sample hold-out test set (n = 6089), our model classified lifetime AUD well (AUC = 0.80). Notably, feature importance analyses revealed that demographic (age, sex, income), substance use (ever smoke tobacco or ever use cannabis), and mental health questionnaires (social isolation) were most informative to classifying AUD. The gradient boosted machine significantly outperformed a linear model and implicated non-zero pairwise interactions among variables, suggesting potential heterogeneity of AUD presentation by income and sex. Further, incrementally incorporating neuroimaging and genetic data as features led to small but consistent improvement in classifying AUD, with small effect sizes distributed across a number of variables (0%-2% gain based on overall model classification). This suggests the continued importance of biological features in classifying AUD beyond psychological and demographic measures, though classification with single selected brain regions may be limited.
conclusionMultimodal multivariable approaches considering nonlinear relationships may improve our understanding of AUD correlates. Particularly, accounting for interactions with demographic factors and integrating information across biological features may enhance model performance.
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.