Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34677133›Full record

ReviewJMIR mental health2021

Use of Automated Thematic Annotations for Small Data Sets in a Psychotherapeutic Context: Systematic Review of Machine Learning Algorithms.

Alexandre Hudon, Mélissa Beaudoin, Kingsada Phraxayavong, Laura Dellazizzo, Stéphane Potvin, Alexandre Dumais

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JMIR mental health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Alexandre HudonCentre de recherche de l'Institut Universitaire en Santé Mentale de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4868-0928
Mélissa BeaudoinCentre de recherche de l'Institut Universitaire en Santé Mentale de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0169-8055
Kingsada PhraxayavongServices et Recherches Psychiatriques AD, Montréal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3113-9104
Laura DellazizzoCentre de recherche de l'Institut Universitaire en Santé Mentale de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8262-130X
Stéphane PotvinCentre de recherche de l'Institut Universitaire en Santé Mentale de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1624-378X
Alexandre DumaisCentre de recherche de l'Institut Universitaire en Santé Mentale de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4480-0064

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA growing body of literature has detailed the use of qualitative analyses to measure the therapeutic processes and intrinsic effectiveness of psychotherapies, which yield small databases. Nonetheless, these approaches have several limitations and machine learning algorithms are needed.

objectiveThe objective of this study is to conduct a systematic review of the use of machine learning for automated text classification for small data sets in the fields of psychiatry, psychology, and social sciences. This review will identify available algorithms and assess if automated classification of textual entities is comparable to the classification done by human evaluators.

methodsA systematic search was performed in the electronic databases of Medline, Web of Science, PsycNet (PsycINFO), and Google Scholar from their inception dates to 2021. The fields of psychiatry, psychology, and social sciences were selected as they include a vast array of textual entities in the domain of mental health that can be reviewed. Additional records identified through cross-referencing were used to find other studies.

resultsThis literature search identified 5442 articles that were eligible for our study after the removal of duplicates. Following abstract screening, 114 full articles were assessed in their entirety, of which 107 were excluded. The remaining 7 studies were analyzed. Classification algorithms such as naive Bayes, decision tree, and support vector machine classifiers were identified. Support vector machine is the most used algorithm and best performing as per the identified articles. Prediction classification scores for the identified algorithms ranged from 53%-91% for the classification of textual entities in 4-7 categories. In addition, 3 of the 7 studies reported an interjudge agreement statistic; these were consistent with agreement statistics for text classification done by human evaluators.

conclusionsA systematic review of available machine learning algorithms for automated text classification for small data sets in several fields (psychiatry, psychology, and social sciences) was conducted. We compared automated classification with classification done by human evaluators. Our results show that it is possible to automatically classify textual entities of a transcript based solely on small databases. Future studies are nevertheless needed to assess whether such algorithms can be implemented in the context of psychotherapies.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceautomated text classificationmachine learningpsychotherapysystematic review

Identifiers

PMID34677133
PMCPMC8571689

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.