Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33944788›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2021

Machine Learning and Natural Language Processing in Mental Health: Systematic Review.

Aziliz Le Glaz, Yannis Haralambous, Deok-Hee Kim-Dufor, Philippe Lenca, Romain Billot, Taylor C Ryan, Jonathan Marsh, Jordan DeVylder, Michel Walter, Sofian Berrouiguet and 1 more

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 172 papers, 15 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
172citing papers in PubMed, 15 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

172 citing papers in PubMed, 15 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. AI Quality Standards in Health Care: Rapid Umbrella Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Trial
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

112 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Aziliz Le GlazURCI Mental Health Department, Brest Medical University Hospital, Brest, France.ORCID 0000-0002-6914-7102
Yannis HaralambousIMT Atlantique, Lab-STICC, UMR CNRS 6285, F-29238, Brest, France.ORCID 0000-0003-1443-6115
Deok-Hee Kim-DuforURCI Mental Health Department, Brest Medical University Hospital, Brest, France.ORCID 0000-0002-0411-0093
Philippe LencaIMT Atlantique, Lab-STICC, UMR CNRS 6285, F-29238, Brest, France.ORCID 0000-0001-5014-2347
Romain BillotIMT Atlantique, Lab-STICC, UMR CNRS 6285, F-29238, Brest, France.ORCID 0000-0002-2614-3822
Taylor C RyanDepartment of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-7484-4749
Jonathan MarshFordham University Graduate School of Social Service, New York, NY, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6666-2283
Jordan DeVylderFordham University Graduate School of Social Service, New York, NY, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5873-4582
Michel WalterURCI Mental Health Department, Brest Medical University Hospital, Brest, France.ORCID 0000-0002-3071-7673
Sofian BerrouiguetURCI Mental Health Department, Brest Medical University Hospital, Brest, France.ORCID 0000-0001-9148-6218
Christophe Lemey *URCI Mental Health Department, Brest Medical University Hospital, Brest, France.ORCID 0000-0002-7308-7958

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMachine learning systems are part of the field of artificial intelligence that automatically learn models from data to make better decisions. Natural language processing (NLP), by using corpora and learning approaches, provides good performance in statistical tasks, such as text classification or sentiment mining.

objectiveThe primary aim of this systematic review was to summarize and characterize, in methodological and technical terms, studies that used machine learning and NLP techniques for mental health. The secondary aim was to consider the potential use of these methods in mental health clinical practice.

methodsThis systematic review follows the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis) guidelines and is registered with PROSPERO (Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; number CRD42019107376). The search was conducted using 4 medical databases (PubMed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and PsycINFO) with the following keywords: machine learning, data mining, psychiatry, mental health, and mental disorder. The exclusion criteria were as follows: languages other than English, anonymization process, case studies, conference papers, and reviews. No limitations on publication dates were imposed.

resultsA total of 327 articles were identified, of which 269 (82.3%) were excluded and 58 (17.7%) were included in the review. The results were organized through a qualitative perspective. Although studies had heterogeneous topics and methods, some themes emerged. Population studies could be grouped into 3 categories: patients included in medical databases, patients who came to the emergency room, and social media users. The main objectives were to extract symptoms, classify severity of illness, compare therapy effectiveness, provide psychopathological clues, and challenge the current nosography. Medical records and social media were the 2 major data sources. With regard to the methods used, preprocessing used the standard methods of NLP and unique identifier extraction dedicated to medical texts. Efficient classifiers were preferred rather than transparent functioning classifiers. Python was the most frequently used platform.

conclusionsMachine learning and NLP models have been highly topical issues in medicine in recent years and may be considered a new paradigm in medical research. However, these processes tend to confirm clinical hypotheses rather than developing entirely new information, and only one major category of the population (ie, social media users) is an imprecise cohort. Moreover, some language-specific features can improve the performance of NLP methods, and their extension to other languages should be more closely investigated. However, machine learning and NLP techniques provide useful information from unexplored data (ie, patients' daily habits that are usually inaccessible to care providers). Before considering It as an additional tool of mental health care, ethical issues remain and should be discussed in a timely manner. Machine learning and NLP methods may offer multiple perspectives in mental health research but should also be considered as tools to support clinical practice.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceNatural Language ProcessingData ManagementHumansMachine LearningMental Healthartificial intelligencedata miningmachine learningmental healthnatural language processingpsychiatry

Identifiers

PMID33944788
PMCPMC8132982

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.