ArticleFrontiers in digital health2025
AI-driven dynamic psychological measurement: correcting university student mental health scales using daily behavioral and cognitive data.
Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate an Artificial Intelligence (AI)-driven dynamic psychological measurement method for correcting traditional mental health scales. We sought to validate its feasibility using daily behavioral and cognitive data from university students and assess its potential as an intervention tool. Methods: A total of 177 university students participated in a one-and-a-half-year study. Using a WeChat mini-program, we collected data from cognitive voting (87 instances), behavioral check-ins (66 instances), and standardized psychological scales (SAS, SDS, SCL-90). Scale scores were dynamically adjusted using Large Language Models (LLMs) and Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) techniques. Paired-sample Results: The dynamic assessment demonstrated superior performance in identifying both anxiety (SAS: dynamic model AUC = 0.95 vs. traditional AUC = 0.86) and depression (SDS: dynamic model AUC = 0.93 vs. traditional AUC = 0.82). Over three semesters, participating students showed significant decreases in clinically-rated anxiety scores on the HAM-A (15.2% reduction; 95% CI for mean difference [1.00, 5.25], Discussion: AI-driven dynamic assessment provides superior accuracy for anxiety (SAS) and depression (SDS) scales over static methods by effectively capturing psychological fluctuations. The significant reductions in clinically-rated anxiety and depression suggest the system may function as an integrated assessment-intervention loop, fostering self-awareness through continuous feedback. High user engagement confirms the method's feasibility. However, the model's diminished specificity for the complex SCL-90 scale over time highlights challenges in handling intricate, long-term symptom patterns. This research supports a shift towards continuous "digital phenotyping" and underscores the need for rigorous validation, multimodal data integration, and robust ethical considerations.
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.