ArticleJMIR formative research2026
Evaluating the Efficacy of AI-Based Interactive Assessments Using Large Language Models for Depression Screening: Development and Usability Study.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe evolution of language models, particularly large language models, has introduced transformative potential for psychological assessment, challenging traditional rating scale methods that have dominated clinical practice for over a century.
objectiveThis study aimed to develop and validate an automated assessment paradigm that integrates natural language processing with conventional measurement tools to assess depressive symptoms, exploring its feasibility as a novel approach in psychological evaluation.
methodsA cohort of 115 participants, including 28 (24.3%) individuals diagnosed with depression, completed the Beck Depression Inventory Fast Screen via a custom ChatGPT interface (BDI-FS-GPT) and the Chinese version of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). Statistical analyses included the Spearman correlation (PHQ-9 vs BDI-FS-GPT scores), Cohen κ (diagnostic agreement), and area under the curve (AUC) evaluation.
resultsSpearman analysis revealed a moderate correlation between PHQ-9 and BDI-FS-GPT scores. The Cohen κ indicated moderate diagnostic agreement between the PHQ-9 and the BDI-FS-GPT (κ=0.43; 76.5% agreement), substantial agreement between the BDI-FS-GPT and the clinical diagnosis (κ=0.72; 88.7% agreement), and moderate agreement between the PHQ-9 and the clinical diagnosis (κ=0.55; 71.4% agreement). The BDI-FS-GPT demonstrated excellent diagnostic accuracy (AUC=0.953) at a cutoff of 3, detecting 89.3% of participants with depression with an 11.5% false-positive rate compared to the PHQ-9 (AUC=0.859) at a cutoff of 5 (sensitivity=71.4%; false-positive rate=13.8%). Participants also reported significantly higher satisfaction with the automated assessment compared to the traditional scale (P=.02).
conclusionsThe automated assessment paradigm framework combines the interactivity and personalization of natural language processing-powered tools with the psychometric rigor of traditional scales, suggesting a preliminary feasibility paradigm for future psychological assessment. Its ability to enhance engagement while maintaining reliability and validity provides encouraging evidence, warranting validation in larger and more diverse studies as large language model technology advances. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1101/2024.07.19.24310543.
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.