Identifying depression in the United States veterans using deep learning algorithms, NHANES 2005–2018
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Depression is a common mental health problem among veterans, with high mortality. Despite the numerous conducted investigations, the prediction and identification of risk factors for depression are still severely limited. This study used a deep learning algorithm to identify depression in veterans and its factors associated with clinical manifestations. METHODS: Our data originated from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2005-2018). A dataset of 2,546 veterans was identified using deep learning and five traditional machine learning algorithms with 10-fold cross-validation. Model performance was assessed by examining the area under the subject operating characteristic curve (AUC), accuracy, recall, specificity, precision, and F1 score. RESULTS: Deep learning had the highest AUC (0.891, 95%CI 0.869-0.914) and specificity (0.906) in identifying depression in veterans. Further study on depression among veterans of different ages showed that the AUC values for deep learning were 0.929 (95%CI 0.904-0.955) in the middle-aged group and 0.924(95%CI 0.900-0.948) in the older age group. In addition to general health conditions, sleep difficulties, memory impairment, work incapacity, income, BMI, and chronic diseases, factors such as vitamins E and C, and palmitic acid were also identified as important influencing factors. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with traditional machine learning methods, deep learning algorithms achieved optimal performance, making it conducive for identifying depression and its risk factors among veterans.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".