ChatGPT is not ready yet for use in providing mental health assessment and interventions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Psychiatry is a specialized field of medicine that focuses on the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of mental health disorders. With advancements in technology and the rise of artificial intelligence (AI), there has been a growing interest in exploring the potential of AI language models systems, such as Chat Generative Pre-training Transformer (ChatGPT), to assist in the field of psychiatry. Objective: Our study aimed to evaluates the effectiveness, reliability and safeness of ChatGPT in assisting patients with mental health problems, and to assess its potential as a collaborative tool for mental health professionals through a simulated interaction with three distinct imaginary patients. Methods: Three imaginary patient scenarios (cases A, B, and C) were created, representing different mental health problems. All three patients present with, and seek to eliminate, the same chief complaint (i.e., difficulty falling asleep and waking up frequently during the night in the last 2°weeks). ChatGPT was engaged as a virtual psychiatric assistant to provide responses and treatment recommendations. Results: In case A, the recommendations were relatively appropriate (albeit non-specific), and could potentially be beneficial for both users and clinicians. However, as complexity of clinical cases increased (cases B and C), the information and recommendations generated by ChatGPT became inappropriate, even dangerous; and the limitations of the program became more glaring. The main strengths of ChatGPT lie in its ability to provide quick responses to user queries and to simulate empathy. One notable limitation is ChatGPT inability to interact with users to collect further information relevant to the diagnosis and management of a patient's clinical condition. Another serious limitation is ChatGPT inability to use critical thinking and clinical judgment to drive patient's management. Conclusion: As for July 2023, ChatGPT failed to give the simple medical advice given certain clinical scenarios. This supports that the quality of ChatGPT-generated content is still far from being a guide for users and professionals to provide accurate mental health information. It remains, therefore, premature to conclude on the usefulness and safety of ChatGPT in mental health practice.
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 | 0.007 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.062 | 0.020 |
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".