ArticleJMIR formative research2024
Aligning Large Language Models for Enhancing Psychiatric Interviews Through Symptom Delineation and Summarization: Pilot Study.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effectiveness of Chatbots in Mental Health Screening and Assessment: Systematic Review.JMIR mental health · 2026Pooled it
- AI-Based Approaches to Refugee Mental Health Care: Systematic Integrative Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Evaluating large language models for assessment of psychosis risk.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- The use and methodological reporting of large language models in qualitative research: a scoping review.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Article
- Large Language Models and Their Applications in Mental Health: Scoping Review.JMIR mental health · 2026Article
- Integrating expert knowledge into large language models improves performance for psychiatric reasoning and diagnosis.Psychiatry research · 2026Article
- An Ubuntu-guided large language model framework for cognitive behavioral mental health dialogue.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Enhanced large language models for effective screening of depression and anxiety.Communications medicine · 2025Article
- Charting the evolution of artificial intelligence mental health chatbots from rule-based systems to large language models: a systematic review.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2025Article
- Retrieval augmented generation for large language models in healthcare: A systematic review.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- From statistics to deep learning: Using large language models in psychiatric research.International journal of methods in psychiatric research · 2025Review
- An intelligent agent for sentence completion test: creation and application in depression assessment.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Leveraging Large Language Models to Estimate Clinically Relevant Psychological Constructs in Psychotherapy Transcripts.Computational psychiatry (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- Synthetic patient and interview transcript creator: an essential tool for LLMs in mental health.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- An overview of diagnostics and therapeutics using large language models.Journal of traumatic stress · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have accelerated their use across various domains. Psychiatric interviews, which are goal-oriented and structured, represent a significantly underexplored area where LLMs can provide substantial value. In this study, we explore the application of LLMs to enhance psychiatric interviews by analyzing counseling data from North Korean defectors who have experienced traumatic events and mental health issues.
objectiveThis study aims to investigate whether LLMs can (1) delineate parts of the conversation that suggest psychiatric symptoms and identify those symptoms, and (2) summarize stressors and symptoms based on the interview dialogue transcript.
methodsGiven the interview transcripts, we align the LLMs to perform 3 tasks: (1) extracting stressors from the transcripts, (2) delineating symptoms and their indicative sections, and (3) summarizing the patients based on the extracted stressors and symptoms. These 3 tasks address the 2 objectives, where delineating symptoms is based on the output from the second task, and generating the summary of the interview incorporates the outputs from all 3 tasks. In this context, the transcript data were labeled by mental health experts for the training and evaluation of the LLMs.
resultsFirst, we present the performance of LLMs in estimating (1) the transcript sections related to psychiatric symptoms and (2) the names of the corresponding symptoms. In the zero-shot inference setting using the GPT-4 Turbo model, 73 out of 102 transcript segments demonstrated a recall mid-token distance d<20 for estimating the sections associated with the symptoms. For evaluating the names of the corresponding symptoms, the fine-tuning method demonstrates a performance advantage over the zero-shot inference setting of the GPT-4 Turbo model. On average, the fine-tuning method achieves an accuracy of 0.82, a precision of 0.83, a recall of 0.82, and an F1-score of 0.82. Second, the transcripts are used to generate summaries for each interviewee using LLMs. This generative task was evaluated using metrics such as Generative Evaluation (G-Eval) and Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers Score (BERTScore). The summaries generated by the GPT-4 Turbo model, utilizing both symptom and stressor information, achieve high average G-Eval scores: coherence of 4.66, consistency of 4.73, fluency of 2.16, and relevance of 4.67. Furthermore, it is noted that the use of retrieval-augmented generation did not lead to a significant improvement in performance.
conclusionsLLMs, using either (1) appropriate prompting techniques or (2) fine-tuning methods with data labeled by mental health experts, achieved an accuracy of over 0.8 for the symptom delineation task when measured across all segments in the transcript. Additionally, they attained a G-Eval score of over 4.6 for coherence in the summarization task. This research contributes to the emerging field of applying LLMs in psychiatric interviews and demonstrates their potential effectiveness in assisting mental health practitioners.
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.