Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39819656›Full record

ArticleJMIR mental health2025

Natural Language Processing and Social Determinants of Health in Mental Health Research: AI-Assisted Scoping Review.

Dmitry A Scherbakov, Nina C Hubig, Leslie A Lenert, Alexander V Alekseyenko, Jihad S Obeid

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mental health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
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

5 authors.

Dmitry A ScherbakovBiomedical Informatics Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, United States.ORCID 0009-0005-7274-0934
Nina C HubigBiomedical Informatics Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-8911-7832
Leslie A LenertBiomedical Informatics Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-9680-5094
Alexander V AlekseyenkoBiomedical Informatics Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-5748-2085
Jihad S ObeidBiomedical Informatics Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-7193-7779

Funding

South Carolina Clinical & Translational Research Institute (SCTR)UL1TR001450 · NCATS · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI BRADY, KATHLEEN T., FLUME, PATRICK A · 2015 to 2024
$41.1M
SC Biomedical Informatics & Data Science for Health Impact (SC BIDS4Health)T15LM013977 · NLM · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI Alexander V Alekseyenko, Brian Dean · 2022 to 2026
$1.2M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001450NLM NIH HHS T15 LM013977
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The use of natural language processing (NLP) in mental health research is increasing, with a wide range of applications and datasets being investigated. Objective: This review aims to summarize the use of NLP in mental health research, with a special focus on the types of text datasets and the use of social determinants of health (SDOH) in NLP projects related to mental health. Methods: The search was conducted in September 2024 using a broad search strategy in PubMed, Scopus, and CINAHL Complete. All citations were uploaded to Covidence (Veritas Health Innovation) software. The screening and extraction process took place in Covidence with the help of a custom large language model (LLM) module developed by our team. This LLM module was calibrated and tuned to automate many aspects of the review process. Results: The screening process, assisted by the custom LLM, led to the inclusion of 1768 studies in the final review. Most of the reviewed studies (n=665, 42.8%) used clinical data as their primary text dataset, followed by social media datasets (n=523, 33.7%). The United States contributed the highest number of studies (n=568, 36.6%), with depression (n=438, 28.2%) and suicide (n=240, 15.5%) being the most frequently investigated mental health issues. Traditional demographic variables, such as age (n=877, 56.5%) and gender (n=760, 49%), were commonly extracted, while SDOH factors were less frequently reported, with urban or rural status being the most used (n=19, 1.2%). Over half of the citations (n=826, 53.2%) did not provide clear information on dataset accessibility, although a sizable number of studies (n=304, 19.6%) made their datasets publicly available. Conclusions: This scoping review underscores the significant role of clinical notes and social media in NLP-based mental health research. Despite the clear relevance of SDOH to mental health, their underutilization presents a gap in current research. This review can be a starting point for researchers looking for an overview of mental health projects using text data. Shared datasets could be used to place more emphasis on SDOH in future studies.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceMental HealthNatural Language ProcessingSocial Determinants of HealthHumansSocial MediaAIartificial intelligenceautomated reviewautomationdatasetsdepressiondeterminantlarge language modelLLMmental healthmental health researchnatural language processingNLPquantitativescoping reviewsuicide

Identifiers

PMID39819656
PMCPMC11756842

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.