Deciphering the Diversity of Mental Models in Neurodevelopmental Disorders: Knowledge Graph Representation of Public Data Using Natural Language Processing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Understanding how individuals think about a topic, known as the mental model, can significantly improve communication, especially in the medical domain where emotions and implications are high. Neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs) represent a group of diagnoses, affecting up to 18% of the global population, involving differences in the development of cognitive or social functions. In this study, we focus on 2 NDDs, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and autism spectrum disorder (ASD), which involve multiple symptoms and interventions requiring interactions between 2 important stakeholders: parents and health professionals. There is a gap in our understanding of differences between mental models for each stakeholder, making communication between stakeholders more difficult than it could be. OBJECTIVE: We aim to build knowledge graphs (KGs) from web-based information relevant to each stakeholder as proxies of mental models. These KGs will accelerate the identification of shared and divergent concerns between stakeholders. The developed KGs can help improve knowledge mobilization, communication, and care for individuals with ADHD and ASD. METHODS: We created 2 data sets by collecting the posts from web-based forums and PubMed abstracts related to ADHD and ASD. We utilized the Unified Medical Language System (UMLS) to detect biomedical concepts and applied Positive Pointwise Mutual Information followed by truncated Singular Value Decomposition to obtain corpus-based concept embeddings for each data set. Each data set is represented as a KG using a property graph model. Semantic relatedness between concepts is calculated to rank the relation strength of concepts and stored in the KG as relation weights. UMLS disorder-relevant semantic types are used to provide additional categorical information about each concept's domain. RESULTS: The developed KGs contain concepts from both data sets, with node sizes representing the co-occurrence frequency of concepts and edge sizes representing relevance between concepts. ADHD- and ASD-related concepts from different semantic types shows diverse areas of concerns and complex needs of the conditions. KG identifies converging and diverging concepts between health professionals literature (PubMed) and parental concerns (web-based forums), which may correspond to the differences between mental models for each stakeholder. CONCLUSIONS: We show for the first time that generating KGs from web-based data can capture the complex needs of families dealing with ADHD or ASD. Moreover, we showed points of convergence between families and health professionals' KGs. Natural language processing-based KG provides access to a large sample size, which is often a limiting factor for traditional in-person mental model mapping. Our work offers a high throughput access to mental model maps, which could be used for further in-person validation, knowledge mobilization projects, and basis for communication about potential blind spots from stakeholders in interactions about NDDs. Future research will be needed to identify how concepts could interact together differently for each stakeholder.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".