Cited by 577Mental Health via WritingArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareSentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining

Machine learning and natural language processing in mental health: systematic review

Open access
Le Glaz, Aziliz, Haralambous, Yannis, Kim-Dufor, Deok-Hee, Lenca, Philippe, Billot, Romain, Ryan, Taylor C, Marsh, Jonathan, DeVylder, Jordan +3 more·2021·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Machine learning systems are part of the field of artificial intelligence that automatically learn models from data to make better decisions. Natural language processing (NLP), by using corpora and learning approaches, provides good performance in statistical tasks, such as text classification or sentiment mining. OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this systematic review was to summarize and characterize, in methodological and technical terms, studies that used machine learning and NLP techniques for mental health. The secondary aim was to consider the potential use of these methods in mental health clinical practice. METHODS: This systematic review follows the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis) guidelines and is registered with PROSPERO (Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; number CRD42019107376). The search was conducted using 4 medical databases (PubMed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and PsycINFO) with the following keywords: machine learning, data mining, psychiatry, mental health, and mental disorder. The exclusion criteria were as follows: languages other than English, anonymization process, case studies, conference papers, and reviews. No limitations on publication dates were imposed. RESULTS: A total of 327 articles were identified, of which 269 (82.3%) were excluded and 58 (17.7%) were included in the review. The results were organized through a qualitative perspective. Although studies had heterogeneous topics and methods, some themes emerged. Population studies could be grouped into 3 categories: patients included in medical databases, patients who came to the emergency room, and social media users. The main objectives were to extract symptoms, classify severity of illness, compare therapy effectiveness, provide psychopathological clues, and challenge the current nosography. Medical records and social media were the 2 major data sources. With regard to the methods used, preprocessing used the standard methods of NLP and unique identifier extraction dedicated to medical texts. Efficient classifiers were preferred rather than transparent functioning classifiers. Python was the most frequently used platform. CONCLUSIONS: Machine learning and NLP models have been highly topical issues in medicine in recent years and may be considered a new paradigm in medical research. However, these processes tend to confirm clinical hypotheses rather than developing entirely new information, and only one major category of the population (ie, social media users) is an imprecise cohort. Moreover, some language-specific features can improve the performance of NLP methods, and their extension to other languages should be more closely investigated. However, machine learning and NLP techniques provide useful information from unexplored data (ie, patients' daily habits that are usually inaccessible to care providers). Before considering It as an additional tool of mental health care, ethical issues remain and should be discussed in a timely manner. Machine learning and NLP methods may offer multiple perspectives in mental health research but should also be considered as tools to support clinical practice.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/15708

Cites

109 of 109 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [15]Gauthier E Brisson L Lenca P Ragusa S Breast Cancer Risk Score: a Data Mining Approach to Improve Readability The International Conference on Data Mining 2011 CDM'11 June 23-27, 2011 Las Vegas, United States 15 21
  2. [16]Gauthier E Brisson L Lenca P Clavel-Chapelon F Ragusa S Challenges to Building a Platform for a Breast Cancer Risk Score Sixth International Conference on Research Challenges in Information Science 2012 5 RCIS'12 June 1-7, 2012 Valencia, Spain
  3. [31]Hays DG Introduction to Computational Linguistics, Mathematical Linguistics and Automatic Language Processing 1967 Cambridge American Elsevier Publishing Co
  4. [44]Haralambous Y Lemey C Lenca P Billot R Kim-Dufor DH Using NLP Methods to Predict Psychiatric Comorbidities the RaPID-3: Resources and ProcessIng of linguistic, para-linguistic and extra-linguistic Data from people with various forms of cognitive, psychiatric and/or developmental impairments Workshop 2020 RAPID'20 May 2-6, 2020 Marseille

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Le Glaz, A., Haralambous, Y., Kim-Dufor, D.-H., Lenca, P., Billot, R., Ryan, T. C., Marsh, J., DeVylder, J., Walter, M., Berrouiguet, S., & Lemey, C.
Affiliations
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire de Brest (FR)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • Fordham University (US)
  • Université de Bretagne Occidentale (FR)
Corresponding author
Lemey, Christophe
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2021-05-04
Volume
23
Issue
5
Pages
e15708
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3089862415
Cited by
576
References
109
Citations by year
2026: 102 · 2025: 155 · 2024: 144 · 2023: 105 · 2022: 57 · 2021: 13
FWCI
7.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Oskar-Bordeaux (Universite de Bordeaux) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-18-RHUS-0014, ANR18)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health via Writing
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Keywords
machine learning, natural language processing, mental health, mental illness, symptom extraction, treatment effectiveness, social media, electronic health records, clinical practice, artificial intelligence in psychiatry, language-specific features, nosography, clinical decision support
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Data Management, Artificial Intelligence, Humans, Mental Health, Natural Language Processing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review