Automatic Construction of a Depression-Domain Lexicon Based on Microblogs: Text Mining Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: According to a World Health Organization report in 2017, there was almost one patient with depression among every 20 people in China. However, the diagnosis of depression is usually difficult in terms of clinical detection owing to slow observation, high cost, and patient resistance. Meanwhile, with the rapid emergence of social networking sites, people tend to share their daily life and disclose inner feelings online frequently, making it possible to effectively identify mental conditions using the rich text information. There are many achievements regarding an English web-based corpus, but for research in China so far, the extraction of language features from web-related depression signals is still in a relatively primary stage. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to propose an effective approach for constructing a depression-domain lexicon. This lexicon will contain language features that could help identify social media users who potentially have depression. Our study also compared the performance of detection with and without our lexicon. METHODS: We autoconstructed a depression-domain lexicon using Word2Vec, a semantic relationship graph, and the label propagation algorithm. These two methods combined performed well in a specific corpus during construction. The lexicon was obtained based on 111,052 Weibo microblogs from 1868 users who were depressed or nondepressed. During depression detection, we considered six features, and we used five classification methods to test the detection performance. RESULTS: The experiment results showed that in terms of the F1 value, our autoconstruction method performed 1% to 6% better than baseline approaches and was more effective and steadier. When applied to detection models like logistic regression and support vector machine, our lexicon helped the models outperform by 2% to 9% and was able to improve the final accuracy of potential depression detection. CONCLUSIONS: Our depression-domain lexicon was proven to be a meaningful input for classification algorithms, providing linguistic insights on the depressive status of test subjects. We believe that this lexicon will enhance early depression detection in people on social media. Future work will need to be carried out on a larger corpus and with more complex methods.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".