Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39783807›Full record

ReviewTurk psikiyatri dergisi = Turkish journal of psychiatry2024

Improving Psychiatry Services with Artificial Intelligence: Opportunities and Challenges.

Muhammed Balli, Aslı Ercan Doğan, Hale Yapici Eser

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Turk psikiyatri dergisi = Turkish journal of psychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

3 authors.

Muhammed Balli
Aslı Ercan Doğan
Hale Yapici Eser

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mental disorders are a critical global public health problem due to their increasing prevalence, rising costs, and significant economic burden. Despite efforts to increase the mental health workforce in Türkiye, there is a significant shortage of psychiatrists, limiting the quality and accessibility of mental health services. This review examines the potential of artificial intelligence (AI), especially large language models, to transform psychiatric care in the world and in Türkiye. AI technologies, including machine learning and deep learning, offer innovative solutions for the diagnosis, personalization of treatment, and monitoring of mental disorders using a variety of data sources, such as speech patterns, neuroimaging, and behavioral measures. Although AI has shown promising capabilities in improving diagnostic accuracy and access to mental health services, challenges such as algorithmic biases, data privacy concerns, ethical implications, and the confabulation phenomenon of large language models prevent the full implementation of AI in practice. The review highlights the need for interdisciplinary collaboration to develop culturally and linguistically adapted AI tools, particularly in the Turkish context, and suggests strategies such as fine-tuning, retrieval-augmented generation, and reinforcement learning from human feedback to increase AI reliability. Advances suggest that AI can improve mental health care by increasing diagnostic accuracy and accessibility while preserving the essential human elements of medical care. Current limitations need to be addressed through rigorous research and ethical frameworks for effective and equitable integration of AI into mental health care. Keywords: Artificial İntelligence, Health, Large Language Model, Machine Learning, Psychiatry.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceMental Health ServicesPsychiatryHumansMental Disorders

Identifiers

PMID39783807
PMCPMC11681275

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.