ReviewDigital health
Artificial intelligence in psychiatry: A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic and therapeutic efficacy.
Review in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence in mental health care: a scoping review of reviews.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Pooled it
- Protocol: Effectiveness of Artificial Intelligence-Based Psychotherapy in Treating Mental Disorders.Campbell systematic reviews · 2026Review
- The future of psychiatry: Reclaiming relevance in an era of technological and systemic transformation.The Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry · 2026Article
- Redesigning Mental Health Care: Core Principles for Integrating Systems, Technology and Clinical Workflows.Current psychiatry reports · 2026Review
- From predictive algorithms to generative intelligence: a decadal bibliometric mapping of global research frontiers in AI-driven mental health (2016-2025).Australian journal of psychology · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence for Mental Health Monitoring: A Solution for Digital Behavioral Health Care and Education-An Umbrella Review.Health science reports · 2026Review
- Article
- Integrating explainable AI with clinical features to enhance ADHD diagnostic understanding.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Depression diagnosis from patient interviews using multimodal machine learning.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Perspective on Using Artificial Intelligence in Alcohol Research and Treatment: Opportunities and Ethical Considerations.Alcohol research : current reviews · 2025Review
- Five years after the pandemic: rethinking the pharmacological management of mental disorders.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence in telemedicine: Topic modelling and network analysis of patents (1992-2024).Digital healthArticle
- Beyond black-box AI: Interpretable hybrid systems for dementia care.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Artificial Intelligence (AI) has demonstrated significant potential in transforming psychiatric care by enhancing diagnostic accuracy and therapeutic interventions. Psychiatry faces challenges like overlapping symptoms, subjective diagnostic methods, and personalized treatment requirements. AI, with its advanced data-processing capabilities, offers innovative solutions to these complexities. Aims: This study systematically reviewed and meta-analyzed the existing literature to evaluate AI's diagnostic accuracy and therapeutic efficacy in psychiatric care, focusing on various psychiatric disorders and AI technologies. Methods: Adhering to PRISMA guidelines, the study included a comprehensive literature search across multiple databases. Empirical studies investigating AI applications in psychiatry, such as machine learning (ML), deep learning (DL), and hybrid models, were selected based on predefined inclusion criteria. The outcomes of interest were diagnostic accuracy and therapeutic efficacy. Statistical analysis employed fixed- and random-effects models, with subgroup and sensitivity analyses exploring the impact of AI methodologies and study designs. Results: A total of 14 studies met the inclusion criteria, representing diverse AI applications in diagnosing and treating psychiatric disorders. The pooled diagnostic accuracy was 85% (95% CI: 80%-87%), with ML models achieving the highest accuracy, followed by hybrid and DL models. For therapeutic efficacy, the pooled effect size was 84% (95% CI: 82%-86%), with ML excelling in personalized treatment plans and symptom tracking. Moderate heterogeneity was observed, reflecting variability in study designs and populations. The risk of bias assessment indicated high methodological rigor in most studies, though challenges like algorithmic biases and data quality remain. Conclusion: AI demonstrates robust diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities in psychiatry, offering a data-driven approach to personalized mental healthcare. Future research should address ethical concerns, standardize methodologies, and explore underrepresented populations to maximize AI's transformative potential in mental health.
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.