ArticleCNS neuroscience & therapeutics2026
Predicting Depression Risk in Physically Inactive Older Adults Using Dietary Antioxidants and Machine Learning: A SHAP-Interpretable Analysis of NHANES.
Article in CNS neuroscience & therapeutics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPhysically inactive older adults represent a high-risk group for depression. However, whether dietary antioxidant intake profiles can help stratify depression risk within this population has not been well established. This study aims to evaluate the predictive ability of dietary antioxidant intake for depression risk in physically inactive adults aged 60 and older using machine learning methods.
methodsThis study utilized data from the 2007-2010 and 2017-2018 cycles of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), including 2,496 physically inactive adults aged 60 years and older. A total of 44 dietary antioxidants and two composite indices: The Composite Dietary Antioxidant Index (CDAI) and the Oxidative Balance Score (OBS) were assessed. Feature selection was performed using the random forest algorithm, followed by the development of six machine learning models: Random forest, XGBoost, k-nearest neighbors, support vector machine, decision tree, and naïve Bayes. Model performance was evaluated using multiple metrics, including area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, F-beta score, and area under the precision-recall curve (PR AUC). Ten-fold cross-validation and bootstrap resampling were employed to validate model robustness. Additionally, Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) analysis was conducted to facilitate individualized risk interpretation.
resultsThe random forest model demonstrated the best performance, with an accuracy of 94.9%, an ROC AUC of 0.943, and a sensitivity of 99.96%. SHAP analysis identified vitamin E, luteolin, total flavonoids, copper, magnesium, and iron as the most influential predictors, all of which showed a nonlinear inverse association with depression risk. Multivariable interaction analysis revealed synergistic protective effects between vitamin E and copper, as well as between luteolin and total flavonoids. In addition, an online risk prediction tool was developed based on the model, allowing for real-time, personalized depression risk assessment upon input of key dietary antioxidant intake data.
conclusionsDietary antioxidant intake demonstrated significant value in predicting depression risk among physically inactive older adults. Key nutrients and their interactions identified through machine learning and SHAP analysis provide new evidence and practical tools for targeted nutritional interventions and early screening of depression.
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.