MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4397005732 · doi:10.2196/53714

Machine Learning, Deep Learning, and Data Preprocessing Techniques for Detecting, Predicting, and Monitoring Stress and Stress-Related Mental Disorders: Scoping Review

2024· review· en· W4397005732 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Mental Health · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotion and Mood Recognition
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintArtificial intelligenceMachine learningStress (linguistics)Computer scienceDeep learningPreprocessorPsychologyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mental stress and its consequent mental health disorders (MDs) constitute a significant public health issue. With the advent of machine learning (ML), there is potential to harness computational techniques for better understanding and addressing mental stress and MDs. This comprehensive review seeks to elucidate the current ML methodologies used in this domain to pave the way for enhanced detection, prediction, and analysis of mental stress and its subsequent MDs. OBJECTIVE: This review aims to investigate the scope of ML methodologies used in the detection, prediction, and analysis of mental stress and its consequent MDs. METHODS: Using a rigorous scoping review process with PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines, this investigation delves into the latest ML algorithms, preprocessing techniques, and data types used in the context of stress and stress-related MDs. RESULTS: A total of 98 peer-reviewed publications were examined for this review. The findings highlight that support vector machine, neural network, and random forest models consistently exhibited superior accuracy and robustness among all ML algorithms examined. Physiological parameters such as heart rate measurements and skin response are prevalently used as stress predictors due to their rich explanatory information concerning stress and stress-related MDs, as well as the relative ease of data acquisition. The application of dimensionality reduction techniques, including mappings, feature selection, filtering, and noise reduction, is frequently observed as a crucial step preceding the training of ML algorithms. CONCLUSIONS: The synthesis of this review identified significant research gaps and outlines future directions for the field. These encompass areas such as model interpretability, model personalization, the incorporation of naturalistic settings, and real-time processing capabilities for the detection and prediction of stress and stress-related MDs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.771
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.407 · 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