AI Applications in Depression Detection and Diagnosis: Bibliometric and Visual Analysis of Trends and Future Directions (Preprint)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND Depression is a highly prevalent and debilitating mental disorder, but its diagnosis largely relies on subjective assessments, creating challenges in accuracy and consistency. Advances in artificial intelligence (AI) offer promising avenues for more objective and efficient diagnostic approaches. Understanding the evolving landscape of AI applications in depression diagnosis is essential for guiding future research and clinical translation. OBJECTIVE This study aims to provide a comprehensive bibliometric and visual analysis of the global research trends, intellectual structure, and emerging frontiers in the application of AI for depression detection and diagnosis from 2015 to 2024. METHODS We conducted a systematic literature search in the Web of Science Core Collection database to identify publications on AI applications in depression diagnosis from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2024. A total of 2304 articles were retrieved and analyzed using bibliometric software CiteSpace. The analysis encompassed temporal trends, keyword dynamics, author collaboration networks, institutional influence, country contributions, and intellectual foundations through co-citation analysis of journals and references. RESULTS The field exhibited exponential growth in publications and citations, particularly after 2018, reflecting increasing academic and clinical interest. Key thematic shifts were observed from traditional machine learning to advanced deep learning, multimodal fusion, and the integration of objective biomarkers (eg, electroencephalography, facial expressions). Leading contributors included institutions from China and the United States, with collaborative links also forming with countries such as Canada and Singapore. The intellectual base is highly interdisciplinary, drawing heavily from computer science, neuroscience, and psychiatry, with a notable surge in engineering and translational research. CONCLUSIONS The integration of AI in depression diagnosis is a rapidly maturing and diversifying field, transitioning from theoretical exploration to clinically relevant applications that emphasize objective, data-driven approaches. The identified trends underscore the need for enhanced interdisciplinary and international collaboration, the development of ethical frameworks, and a focus on translating technological innovations into accessible and equitable mental health solutions. These findings offer valuable insights for researchers, clinicians, and policy makers to strategically advance AI-assisted depression diagnostics globally.
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 | 0.008 | 0.052 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.096 | 0.107 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.003 |
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".