ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Scoping Review on the Multimodal Classification of Depression and Experimental Study on Existing Multimodal Models.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep learning for detecting depression in individuals with and without alexithymia.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Multimodal Prediction of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder and Comorbid Depression Severity and Energy Delivered by Deep Brain Electrodes.IEEE transactions on affective computingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Depression is a prevalent comorbidity in patients with severe physical disorders, such as cancer, stroke, and coronary diseases. Although it can significantly impact the course of the primary disease, the signs of depression are often underestimated and overlooked. The aim of this paper was to review algorithms for the automatic, uniform, and multimodal classification of signs of depression from human conversations and to evaluate their accuracy. For the scoping review, the PRISMA guidelines for scoping reviews were followed. In the scoping review, the search yielded 1095 papers, out of which 20 papers (8.26%) included more than two modalities, and 3 of those papers provided codes. Within the scope of this review, supported vector machine (SVM), random forest (RF), and long short-term memory network (LSTM; with gated and non-gated recurrent units) models, as well as different combinations of features, were identified as the most widely researched techniques. We tested the models using the DAIC-WOZ dataset (original training dataset) and using the SymptomMedia dataset to further assess their reliability and dependency on the nature of the training datasets. The best performance was obtained by the LSTM with gated recurrent units (F1-score of 0.64 for the DAIC-WOZ dataset). However, with a drop to an F1-score of 0.56 for the SymptomMedia dataset, the method also appears to be the most data-dependent.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.