Debate and Dilemmas Regarding Generative AI in Mental Health Care: Scoping Review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Mental disorders have ranked among the top 10 prevalent causes of burden on a global scale. Generative artificial intelligence (GAI) has emerged as a promising and innovative technological advancement that has significant potential in the field of mental health care. Nevertheless, there is a scarcity of research dedicated to examining and understanding the application landscape of GAI within this domain. OBJECTIVE: This review aims to inform the current state of GAI knowledge and identify its key uses in the mental health domain by consolidating relevant literature. METHODS: Records were searched within 8 reputable sources including Web of Science, PubMed, IEEE Xplore, medRxiv, bioRxiv, Google Scholar, CNKI and Wanfang databases between 2013 and 2023. Our focus was on original, empirical research with either English or Chinese publications that use GAI technologies to benefit mental health. For an exhaustive search, we also checked the studies cited by relevant literature. Two reviewers were responsible for the data selection process, and all the extracted data were synthesized and summarized for brief and in-depth analyses depending on the GAI approaches used (traditional retrieval and rule-based techniques vs advanced GAI techniques). RESULTS: In this review of 144 articles, 44 (30.6%) met the inclusion criteria for detailed analysis. Six key uses of advanced GAI emerged: mental disorder detection, counseling support, therapeutic application, clinical training, clinical decision-making support, and goal-driven optimization. Advanced GAI systems have been mainly focused on therapeutic applications (n=19, 43%) and counseling support (n=13, 30%), with clinical training being the least common. Most studies (n=28, 64%) focused broadly on mental health, while specific conditions such as anxiety (n=1, 2%), bipolar disorder (n=2, 5%), eating disorders (n=1, 2%), posttraumatic stress disorder (n=2, 5%), and schizophrenia (n=1, 2%) received limited attention. Despite prevalent use, the efficacy of ChatGPT in the detection of mental disorders remains insufficient. In addition, 100 articles on traditional GAI approaches were found, indicating diverse areas where advanced GAI could enhance mental health care. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a comprehensive overview of the use of GAI in mental health care, which serves as a valuable guide for future research, practical applications, and policy development in this domain. While GAI demonstrates promise in augmenting mental health care services, its inherent limitations emphasize its role as a supplementary tool rather than a replacement for trained mental health providers. A conscientious and ethical integration of GAI techniques is necessary, ensuring a balanced approach that maximizes benefits while mitigating potential challenges in mental health care practices.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».