Beyond human expertise: the promise and limitations of ChatGPT in suicide risk assessment
Open accessAbstract
ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence language model developed by OpenAI, holds the potential for contributing to the field of mental health. Nevertheless, although ChatGPT theoretically shows promise, its clinical abilities in suicide prevention, a significant mental health concern, have yet to be demonstrated. To address this knowledge gap, this study aims to compare ChatGPT’s assessments of mental health indicators to those of mental health professionals in a hypothetical case study that focuses on suicide risk assessment. Specifically, ChatGPT was asked to evaluate a text vignette describing a hypothetical patient with varying levels of perceived burdensomeness and thwarted belongingness. The ChatGPT assessments were compared to the norms of mental health professionals. The results indicated that ChatGPT rated the risk of suicide attempts lower than did the mental health professionals in all conditions. Furthermore, ChatGPT rated mental resilience lower than the norms in most conditions. These results imply that gatekeepers, patients or even mental health professionals who rely on ChatGPT for evaluating suicidal risk or as a complementary tool to improve decision-making may receive an inaccurate assessment that underestimates the actual suicide risk.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In one study, ChatGPT appropriately determined that the risk for suicidal ideation and suicide attempts was highest for the vignette with both high perceived burdensomeness and high thwarted belongingness, but it predicted lower suicide risk overall than mental health professionals.
“ChatGPT appropriately determined that the risk for suicidal ideation and suicide attempts was highest for the vignette with both high perceived burdensomeness and high thwarted belongingness, but it predicted lower suicide risk overall than did mental health professionals who reviewed the same vignettes.”
From The Opportunities and Risks of Large Language Models in Mental Health (2024) · cites this paper as [23]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 37 · Cited by 116
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- [23]Joiner TE. Why people die by suicide. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press (2005).
- [26]Shneidman E. S. A psychological approach to suicide. Paper presented at the American Psychological Association convention, 1986, Washington, DC, US; this chapter is based upon one of the 1986 master lectures that were presented at the aforementioned convention. (1987).
- Authors
- Elyoseph, Z., & Levkovich, I.
- Affiliations
- The Max Stern Yezreel Valley College (IL)
- Oranim Academic College of Education (IL)
- Corresponding author
- Elyoseph, Zohar
- Venue
- Frontiers in Psychiatry
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2023-08-01
- Volume
- 14
- Pages
- 1213141-1213141
- ISSN
- 1664-0640 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC10427505
- OpenAlex
- W4385459268
- Cited by
- 116
- References
- 37
- Citations by year
- 2026: 33 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 9
- FWCI
- 33.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Frontiers in Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health via Writing
- Keywords
- ChatGPT, suicide risk assessment, suicide prevention, artificial intelligence in mental health, perceived burdensomeness, thwarted belongingness, psychological resilience, risk underestimation, clinical decision support
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
