ArticleJournal of affective disorders2025
Estimating depression severity in narrative clinical notes using large language models.
Article in Journal of affective disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Measuring Depression Severity With Clinical Global Impression-Severity Scale Scores From Clinical Notes Using Large Language Models: Validation Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Large Language Models for Depression Detection: A Review with Prospects of Incomplete Multimodality.Brain sciences · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence and the Potential Transformation of Mental Health.JAMA psychiatry · 2026Article
- A roadmap for medical large language models: a review of foundations, applications, and challenges.Military Medical Research · 2026Review
- Using a fine-tuned large language model for symptom-based depression evaluation.NPJ digital medicine · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDepression treatment guidelines emphasize measurement-based care using patient-reported outcome measures, yet their impact on narrative documentation quality remains underexplored.
methodsWe sampled 15,000 narrative clinical outpatient notes from the electronic health record of a large academic medical center, reflecting visits between January 2, 2019 and January 30, 2024, for which a 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) was completed at the same time. After censoring PHQ-9 scores from notes, we estimated severity of depressive symptoms with a foundational large language model (gpt4o-08-06) in a HIPAA-compliant enclave. We estimated correlation between true PHQ-9 and model-estimated score and examined the predictive performance of the model for moderate or greater depressive symptoms.
resultsMean age was 46.3 years (SD 14.9); 9083 (60.6 %) identified as female. 925 (6.2 %) identified as Asian, 638 (4.3 %) as Black, 853 (5.7 %) as another race, and 12,187 (81.2 %) as White. A total of 1044 (7.0 %) identified as Hispanic ethnicity, while 12,699 (84.7 %) were non-Hispanic. Mean measured PHQ-9 score was 1.23 (SD 3.45); 721 (4.8 %) met criteria for moderate or greater depressive symptoms. LLM-predicted PHQ-9 scores were modestly correlated with actual scores (r
conclusionA foundational LLM performed poorly but consistently across subgroups in imputing PHQ-9 scores from notes when actual PHQ-9 reporting was ablated. This result suggests the extent to which inclusion of PROMs may impoverish documentation of psychiatric symptoms.
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.