ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2026
Accurate and efficient data-driven psychiatric assessment using machine learning.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccurate assessment of mental disorders and learning disabilities is essential for timely intervention. Machine learning and feature selection techniques have potential for improving the accuracy and efficiency of mental health assessments. However, limited research has explored the use of large transdiagnostic datasets, as well as the application of these techniques in developing quick, briefer, question-based assessments. This study applies machine learning and feature selection techniques to a large transdiagnostic dataset featuring a high number of assessment items, and to create a tool for construction of streamlined, efficient, and effective assessments from existing data.
methodsUsing the Healthy Brain Network dataset (n = 4,136 at the time this study was conducted) containing over 1000 questionnaire items, a two-stage feature selection approach, with Elastic Net models, was used to identify optimal, parsimonious item subsets for assessing various disorders and symptoms, as well as custom test-based outcome measures for learning disabilities. The study then compared model performance to existing assessments through rigorous cross-validation.
resultsMachine learning models using parsimonious item subsets significantly outperformed traditional assessments (p = 0.004). Models for specific learning disorders achieved AUC values up to 0.855. Importantly, restricting analysis to non-proprietary assessment items did not significantly reduce performance. DISCUSSION: This study demonstrates the feasibility of using existing datasets to create efficient, effective assessment tools for mental disorders and learning disabilities. Our open-source, modular software architecture facilitates adaptation to diverse datasets, though external validation remains necessary before clinical implementation. The ability to achieve strong performance using only non-proprietary items supports the development of accessible assessment tools.
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.