Cargando…

Natural language processing for mental health interventions: a systematic review and research framework

Neuropsychiatric disorders pose a high societal cost, but their treatment is hindered by lack of objective outcomes and fidelity metrics. AI technologies and specifically Natural Language Processing (NLP) have emerged as tools to study mental health interventions (MHI) at the level of their constitu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Malgaroli, Matteo, Hull, Thomas D., Zech, James M., Althoff, Tim
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10556019/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37798296
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41398-023-02592-2
_version_ 1785116787355942912
author Malgaroli, Matteo
Hull, Thomas D.
Zech, James M.
Althoff, Tim
author_facet Malgaroli, Matteo
Hull, Thomas D.
Zech, James M.
Althoff, Tim
author_sort Malgaroli, Matteo
collection PubMed
description Neuropsychiatric disorders pose a high societal cost, but their treatment is hindered by lack of objective outcomes and fidelity metrics. AI technologies and specifically Natural Language Processing (NLP) have emerged as tools to study mental health interventions (MHI) at the level of their constituent conversations. However, NLP’s potential to address clinical and research challenges remains unclear. We therefore conducted a pre-registered systematic review of NLP-MHI studies using PRISMA guidelines (osf.io/s52jh) to evaluate their models, clinical applications, and to identify biases and gaps. Candidate studies (n = 19,756), including peer-reviewed AI conference manuscripts, were collected up to January 2023 through PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, Google Scholar, and ArXiv. A total of 102 articles were included to investigate their computational characteristics (NLP algorithms, audio features, machine learning pipelines, outcome metrics), clinical characteristics (clinical ground truths, study samples, clinical focus), and limitations. Results indicate a rapid growth of NLP MHI studies since 2019, characterized by increased sample sizes and use of large language models. Digital health platforms were the largest providers of MHI data. Ground truth for supervised learning models was based on clinician ratings (n = 31), patient self-report (n = 29) and annotations by raters (n = 26). Text-based features contributed more to model accuracy than audio markers. Patients’ clinical presentation (n = 34), response to intervention (n = 11), intervention monitoring (n = 20), providers’ characteristics (n = 12), relational dynamics (n = 14), and data preparation (n = 4) were commonly investigated clinical categories. Limitations of reviewed studies included lack of linguistic diversity, limited reproducibility, and population bias. A research framework is developed and validated (NLPxMHI) to assist computational and clinical researchers in addressing the remaining gaps in applying NLP to MHI, with the goal of improving clinical utility, data access, and fairness.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10556019
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105560192023-10-07 Natural language processing for mental health interventions: a systematic review and research framework Malgaroli, Matteo Hull, Thomas D. Zech, James M. Althoff, Tim Transl Psychiatry Systematic Review Neuropsychiatric disorders pose a high societal cost, but their treatment is hindered by lack of objective outcomes and fidelity metrics. AI technologies and specifically Natural Language Processing (NLP) have emerged as tools to study mental health interventions (MHI) at the level of their constituent conversations. However, NLP’s potential to address clinical and research challenges remains unclear. We therefore conducted a pre-registered systematic review of NLP-MHI studies using PRISMA guidelines (osf.io/s52jh) to evaluate their models, clinical applications, and to identify biases and gaps. Candidate studies (n = 19,756), including peer-reviewed AI conference manuscripts, were collected up to January 2023 through PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, Google Scholar, and ArXiv. A total of 102 articles were included to investigate their computational characteristics (NLP algorithms, audio features, machine learning pipelines, outcome metrics), clinical characteristics (clinical ground truths, study samples, clinical focus), and limitations. Results indicate a rapid growth of NLP MHI studies since 2019, characterized by increased sample sizes and use of large language models. Digital health platforms were the largest providers of MHI data. Ground truth for supervised learning models was based on clinician ratings (n = 31), patient self-report (n = 29) and annotations by raters (n = 26). Text-based features contributed more to model accuracy than audio markers. Patients’ clinical presentation (n = 34), response to intervention (n = 11), intervention monitoring (n = 20), providers’ characteristics (n = 12), relational dynamics (n = 14), and data preparation (n = 4) were commonly investigated clinical categories. Limitations of reviewed studies included lack of linguistic diversity, limited reproducibility, and population bias. A research framework is developed and validated (NLPxMHI) to assist computational and clinical researchers in addressing the remaining gaps in applying NLP to MHI, with the goal of improving clinical utility, data access, and fairness. Nature Publishing Group UK 2023-10-06 /pmc/articles/PMC10556019/ /pubmed/37798296 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41398-023-02592-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Malgaroli, Matteo
Hull, Thomas D.
Zech, James M.
Althoff, Tim
Natural language processing for mental health interventions: a systematic review and research framework
title Natural language processing for mental health interventions: a systematic review and research framework
title_full Natural language processing for mental health interventions: a systematic review and research framework
title_fullStr Natural language processing for mental health interventions: a systematic review and research framework
title_full_unstemmed Natural language processing for mental health interventions: a systematic review and research framework
title_short Natural language processing for mental health interventions: a systematic review and research framework
title_sort natural language processing for mental health interventions: a systematic review and research framework
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10556019/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37798296
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41398-023-02592-2
work_keys_str_mv AT malgarolimatteo naturallanguageprocessingformentalhealthinterventionsasystematicreviewandresearchframework
AT hullthomasd naturallanguageprocessingformentalhealthinterventionsasystematicreviewandresearchframework
AT zechjamesm naturallanguageprocessingformentalhealthinterventionsasystematicreviewandresearchframework
AT althofftim naturallanguageprocessingformentalhealthinterventionsasystematicreviewandresearchframework