ArticleBMC psychiatry2025
AI for mental health: clinician expectations and priorities in computational psychiatry.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinicians' Attitudes and Perceptions on the Adoption of AI in Mental Health Care: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence Tools in Psychiatric Education: Innovating While Maintaining Human Connection.Academic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Integrated Virtual Reality in Mental Health Care: A Scoping Review of Evidence, Clinical Applications, and Future Directions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- A cautionary tale for AI and machine learning in psychiatry.Translational psychiatry · 2026Review
- Understanding psychiatrist readiness for AI: a study of access, self-efficacy, trust, and design expectations.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- From Engel's Bio-Psycho-Social model to the personalized health determinants model: a comprehensive framework and illustrative operationalization for precision health.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mental disorders represent a major global health challenge, with an estimated lifetime prevalence approaching 30%. Despite the availability of effective treatments, access to mental health care remains inadequate. Computational psychiatry, leveraging advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML), has shown potential for transforming mental health care by improving diagnosis, prognosis, and the personalization of treatment. However, integrating these technologies into routine clinical practice remains limited due to technical and infrastructure challenges. While ongoing computational developments will enhance AI's precision, many studies focus on its broad potential without providing specific, clinician-informed guidance for immediate application. To address this gap and the urgent need for clinically actionable AI tools, we surveyed 53 psychiatrists and clinical psychologists to identify their priorities for AI in mental health care. Our findings reveal a strong preference for tools enabling continuous monitoring and predictive modeling, particularly in outpatient settings. Clinicians prioritize accurate predictions of symptom trajectories and proactive patient monitoring over interpretability and explicit treatment recommendations. Self-reports, third-party observations, and sleep quality and duration emerged as key data inputs for effective models. Together, this study provides a clinician-driven roadmap for AI integration, emphasizing predictive models based on ecological momentary assessment (EMA) data to forecast disorder trajectories and support real-world practice.
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.