ArticlePeerJ2024
The impact of history of depression and access to weapons on suicide risk assessment: a comparison of ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4.
Article in PeerJ, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effectiveness of Chatbots in Mental Health Screening and Assessment: Systematic Review.JMIR mental health · 2026Pooled it
- The Application and Ethical Implication of Generative AI in Mental Health: Systematic Review.JMIR mental health · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluating of BERT-based and Large Language Mod for Suicide Detection, Prevention, and Risk Assessment: A Systematic Review.Journal of medical systems · 2024Pooled it
- Are artificial intelligence chatbots safe for suicide risk assessment? A narratively synthesized review of current evidence.Global mental health (Cambridge, England) · 2026Review
- Gender Differences and Comorbidities in Major Depression.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2026Review
- ChatGPT Clinical Use in Mental Health Care: Scoping Review of Empirical Evidence.JMIR mental health · 2025Article
- Large language model performance versus human expert ratings in automated suicide risk assessment.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Applying language models for suicide prevention: evaluating news article adherence to WHO reporting guidelines.Npj mental health research · 2025Article
- The role of generative artificial intelligence in evaluating adherence to responsible press media reports on suicide: A multisite, three-language study.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2025Article
- Is Artificial Intelligence the Next Co-Pilot for Primary Care in Diagnosing and Recommending Treatments for Depression?Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Effectiveness of generative AI-large language models' recognition of veteran suicide risk: a comparison with human mental health providers using a risk stratification model.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- The externalization of internal experiences in psychotherapy through generative artificial intelligence: a theoretical, clinical, and ethical analysis.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- Editorial: Empowering suicide prevention efforts with generative AI technology.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 in incorporating critical risk factors, namely history of depression and access to weapons, into suicide risk assessments. Both models assessed suicide risk using scenarios that featured individuals with and without a history of depression and access to weapons. The models estimated the likelihood of suicidal thoughts, suicide attempts, serious suicide attempts, and suicide-related mortality on a Likert scale. A multivariate three-way ANOVA analysis with Bonferroni
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.