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

Using Social Media for Mental Health Surveillance

2020· review· en· W3111058005 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

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