- Dimensionality-reduced machine-learning models demonstrated measurable discrimination for PTSD risk; choice of model should reflect screening priorities.
- XGBoost achieved highest external AUC (PCA 0.8931; FA 0.8832); random forest offered a sensitivity-oriented alternative.
- SHAP identified main contributors: acute stress disorder, SDS and SAS scores, passive smoking, monthly income, smoking status, BMI, and age.
Biomed Environ Sci. 2026 Sep 20;39(9):1093-1103. doi: 10.3967/bes2026.089.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Rescue workers are frequently exposed to traumatic events and are at a high risk of developing post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). We developed and compared machine-learning models for PTSD risk and assessed their generalizability.
METHODS: This multicenter cross-sectional study included 13,462 rescue workers from 13 units for model development/internal validation and 8,757 workers from two additional units for external validation. Probable PTSD was defined as a PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 score ≥ 33. Sixteen variables were reduced using principal component analysis (PCA) or exploratory factor analysis (FA). Nine machine-learning algorithms were trained using a stratified 70:30 split, 5-fold cross-validation, and synthetic minority oversampling.
RESULTS: Among PCA-based models, extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) achieved the highest external area under the curve (AUC, 0.8931), whereas random forest showed the highest sensitivity. Among the factor-analysis-based models, XGBoost achieved the highest external AUC (0.8832), whereas random forest provided a sensitivity-oriented alternative. Original-variable SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis identified acute stress disorder (ASD), self-rating depression scale (SDS), self-rating anxiety scale (SAS), passive smoking, monthly family income, smoking status, body mass index (BMI), and age as the main contributors.
CONCLUSION: Dimensionality-reduced machine-learning models showed measurable discriminatory ability for PTSD risk stratification, and model choice should reflect screening priorities.
PMID:42870597 | DOI:10.3967/bes2026.089
Share Evidence Blueprint
Save to Google Notes

Search Google Scholar
Save as PDF
⭐ My Revision List

