Deep temporal modelling of clinical depression through social media text
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We describe the development of a model to detect user-level clinical depression based on a user’s temporal social media posts. Our model uses a Depression Symptoms Detection (DSD) classifier, which is trained on the largest existing samples of clinician annotated tweets for clinical depression symptoms. We subsequently use our DSD model to extract clinically relevant features, e.g., depression scores and their consequent temporal patterns, as well as user posting activity patterns, e.g., quantifying their “no activity” or “silence.” Furthermore, to evaluate the efficacy of these extracted features, we create three kinds of datasets including a test dataset, from two existing well-known benchmark datasets for user-level depression detection. We then provide accuracy measures based on single features, baseline features and feature ablation tests, at several different levels of temporal granularity. The relevant data distributions and clinical depression detection related settings can be exploited to draw a complete picture of the impact of different features across our created datasets. Finally, we show that, in general, only semantic oriented representation models perform well. However, clinical features may enhance overall performance provided that the training and testing distribution is similar, and there is more data in a user’s timeline. The consequence is that the predictive capability of depression scores increase significantly while used in a more sensitive clinical depression detection settings.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".