ArticleJAMIA open2026
Revealing the impact of COVID-19 on mental health through machine learning.
Article in JAMIA open, 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
Objective: The COVID-19 pandemic caused a major health crisis worldwide significantly impacting mental well-being. In this study, our objective is to assess the resilience of pre-pandemic depression level prediction models when applied to COVID-19 era data. We leverage advanced Machine Learning (ML) and Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) techniques to identify the key factors impacting the shifts in depression levels during the pandemic. We aim to align the later identification with interventions and preparedness for future pandemics. Materials and methods: We use, in this study, a data-driven methodology using National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) household survey data, explicitly covering the years 2019-2022. The NHIS data is used to build both the pre-pandemic (2019) and COVID-19 (2020-2022) models discussed in our comparative evaluation. Various ML techniques are supported (1) upstream, using feature selection methods to reduce both irrelevance and the high dimensionality of social-nature data, and (2) downstream, by an XAI-based approach to gain insight into the pandemic-associated phenomena that mostly impacted the mental health of individuals. In our empirical experiments, we use over 100 000 entries across the 4 yearly datasets, where we apply an 80%-20% training/testing split for models building and evaluation. Results: The outcomes of our empirical study show that classifiers trained solely on pre-COVID-19 data performed poorly when applied to COVID-19 era data. Conversely, models retrained on pandemic-specific data demonstrated high performance. In particular, the Random Forest (RF) classifier achieved the best performance, recording an average accuracy of 98.10% across the COVID-19 era datasets. With respect to the depression key factors' identification, XAI techniques provided actionable insights, revealing that features such as Delayed Medical Care, Family Poverty, Participation in Social Activities, and Marital Status were the most influential factors contributing to depression challenges during the pandemic. Discussion and conclusion: The significant decline in the performance of pre-pandemic models on COVID-19 data reveals the profound impact of the pandemic on mental health, highlighting the need for new predictive models tailored to crisis circumstances. The built RF model, uses appropriate pandemic data, performed accurately during the COVID-19 era with an accuracy of 98.1%. XAI techniques confirmed that factors such as delayed medical care, family poverty, job loss, and reduced social involvement were critical drivers that impacted the decline in mental health during the pandemic.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.