ArticleJMIR research protocols2025
Exploring the Credibility of Large Language Models for Mental Health Support: Protocol for a Scoping Review.
Article in JMIR research protocols, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Exploring the application boundaries of LLMs in mental health: a systematic scoping review.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Pooled it
- Frameworks, Methodologies, and Tools for Evaluating Large Language Models in Digital Mental Health Interventions: Protocol for a Scoping Review.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- LINS: A general medical Q&A framework for enhancing the quality and credibility of LLM-generated responses.Nature communications · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe rapid evolution of large language models (LLMs), such as Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT; Google) and GPT (OpenAI), has introduced significant advancements in natural language processing. These models are increasingly integrated into various applications, including mental health support. However, the credibility of LLMs in providing reliable and explainable mental health information and support remains underexplored.
objectiveThis scoping review systematically maps the factors influencing the credibility of LLMs in mental health support, including reliability, explainability, and ethical considerations. The review is expected to offer critical insights for practitioners, researchers, and policy makers, guiding future research and policy development. These findings will contribute to the responsible integration of LLMs into mental health care, with a focus on maintaining ethical standards and user trust.
methodsThis review follows PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology. Eligibility criteria include studies that apply transformer-based generative language models in mental health support, such as BERT and GPT. Sources include PsycINFO, MEDLINE via PubMed, Web of Science, IEEE Xplore, and ACM Digital Library. A systematic search of studies from 2019 onward will be conducted and updated until October 2024. Data will be synthesized qualitatively. The Population, Concept, and Context framework will guide the inclusion criteria. Two independent reviewers will screen and extract data, resolving discrepancies through discussion. Data will be synthesized and presented descriptively.
resultsAs of September 2024, this study is currently in progress, with the systematic search completed and the screening phase ongoing. We expect to complete data extraction by early November 2024 and synthesis by late November 2024.
conclusionsThis scoping review will map the current evidence on the credibility of LLMs in mental health support. It will identify factors influencing the reliability, explainability, and ethical considerations of these models, providing insights for practitioners, researchers, policy makers, and users. These findings will fill a critical gap in the literature and inform future research, practice, and policy development, ensuring the responsible integration of LLMs in mental health services. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/62865.
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.