MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3111058005 · doi:10.1145/3422824

Using Social Media for Mental Health Surveillance

2020· review· en· W3111058005 on OpenAlexafffund
Ruba Skaik, Diana Inkpen

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Computing Surveys · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health via Writing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceUSableSocial mediaMental healthSuicidal ideationData scienceField (mathematics)Big dataPublic health surveillanceArtificial intelligencePublic healthWorld Wide WebSuicide preventionPoison controlData miningPsychiatryMedicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data on social media contain a wealth of user information. Big data research of social media data may also support standard surveillance approaches and provide decision-makers with usable information. These data can be analyzed using Natural Language Processing (NLP) and Machine Learning (ML) techniques to detect signs of mental disorders that need attention, such as depression and suicide ideation. This article presents the recent trends and tools that are used in this field, the different means for data collection, and the current applications of ML and NLP in the surveillance of public mental health. We highlight the best practices and the challenges. Furthermore, we discuss the current gaps that need to be addressed and resolved.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0100.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.320
GPT teacher head0.508
Teacher spread0.188 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations148
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Computing SurveysSame topicMental Health via WritingFrench-language works237,207