ArticleInternational journal of women's health2026
Machine Learning-Based Prediction of Antepartum Depression Symptoms: A Prospective Cohort Study.
Article in International journal of women's health, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Antepartum depression is a common mental health issue. This study aimed to develop a tool to predict antepartum depression risk and contribute to improving the screening rate of antepartum depression. Methods: This study used a prospective design, including a total of 1,701 mid-pregnancy women, who were followed up until late pregnancy. We comprehensively incorporate predictors from biological, psychological, demography, and obstetrics. Several machine learning algorithms (logistic regression, random forest, support vector machine and extreme gradient boosting) were used to predict antepartum depression. Predictive variables were screened using the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO). The models were built based on 70% of the training set and evaluated on the remaining 30% test set using metrics such as accuracy, precision, sensitivity, specificity, F1 score, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). We also ranked the importance of the variables. Results: LASSO was used to select the nine variables (out of a total of 42). The importance ranking of the nine variables is as follows: psychological resilience, rumination, stress, social support, body image satisfaction during pregnancy, preparation for neonatal parenting, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, work status and relationship with parents. The logistic regression achieved 68% accuracy, 25.6% precision, 68.7% sensitivity, 68.4% specificity, 37.3% F1-score, and 76% AUC in the test set. The random forest achieved 66.1% accuracy, 24.1% precision, 68.5% sensitivity, 65.7% specificity, 35.6% F1-score, and 75.4% AUC in the test set. The support vector machine achieved 65.1% accuracy, 23% precision, 65.7% sensitivity, 65.1% specificity, 34.1% F1-score, and 70.1% AUC in the test set. The extreme gradient boosting achieved 86.8% accuracy, 57.8% precision, 15.7% sensitivity, 98.1% specificity, 24.7% F1-score, and 71.8% AUC in the test set. Conclusion: The antepartum depression risk prediction model developed in this study has moderate discriminative ability, which helps achieve early identification and classification management of risk, and provides a basis for targeted interventions.
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.