MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Machine Learning and Embedding Models for Multimodal Mental Health Diagnostics

2025· article· en· W4413321649 on OpenAlexaff
Aya E. Fouda, Mohammed E. Fouda

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health via Writing
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceEmbeddingMental healthArtificial intelligenceMachine learningHuman–computer interactionPsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces a novel framework for analyzing interview data in different modalities to enhance the accuracy of mental health diagnostics. Addressing the growing need for effective detection of psychological disorders like depression and PTSD, our approach integrates text, audio, and video modalities, leveraging their complementary nature to provide a compre-hensive understanding of both verbal and non-verbal cues. We explore various embedding techniques, combined with machine learning and deep learning models-including Convolutional Neural Networks, and Bidirectional Long Short-Term Memory networks-to extract meaningful features. Our experiments on the E-DAIC dataset demonstrate the effectiveness of different data formats in identifying patterns indicative of mental health conditions. Specifically, text modality yielded the highest balanced accuracy, achieving 92.4% for depression and 88.1 % for PTSD. Moreover, switching the classification layer from Multilayer Perceptron to Support Vector Machine improved the accuracy in multiple configurations. These results compare the performance of different modalities analysis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.391 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMental Health via WritingFrench-language works237,207