CALLM: Enhancing Clinical Interview Analysis Through Data Augmentation With Large Language Models
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The global prevalence of mental health disorders is increasing, leading to a significant economic burden estimated in trillions of dollars. In automated mental health diagnosis, the scarcity and imbalance of clinical data pose considerable challenges for researchers, limiting the effectiveness of machine learning algorithms. To cope with this issue, this paper aims to introduce a novel clinical transcript data augmentation framework by leveraging large language models (CALLM). The framework follows a "patient-doctor role-playing" intuition to generate realistic synthetic data. In addition, our study introduces a unique "Textbook-Assignment-Application" (T-A-A) partitioning approach to offer a systematic means of crafting synthetic clinical interview datasets. Concurrently, we have also developed a "Response-Reason" prompt engineering paradigm to generate highly authentic and diagnostically valuable transcripts. By leveraging a fine-tuned DistilBERT model on the E-DAIC PTSD dataset, we achieved a balanced accuracy of 0.77, an F1-score of 0.70, and an AUC of 0.78 during test set evaluations, which showcase robust adaptability in both Zero-Shot Learning (ZSL) and Few-Shot Learning (FSL) scenarios. We further compare the CALLM framework with other data augmentation methods and PTSD diagnostic works and demonstrates consistent improvements. Compared to conventional data collection methods, our synthetic dataset not only demonstrates superior performance but also incurs less than 1% of the associated costs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it