Artificial intelligence applications in social media for depression screening: A systematic review protocol for content validity processes.


Journal

PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2021
Historique:
received: 15 01 2021
accepted: 20 10 2021
entrez: 8 11 2021
pubmed: 9 11 2021
medline: 30 12 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The popularization of social media has led to the coalescing of user groups around mental health conditions; in particular, depression. Social media offers a rich environment for contextualizing and predicting users' self-reported burden of depression. Modern artificial intelligence (AI) methods are commonly employed in analyzing user-generated sentiment on social media. In the forthcoming systematic review, we will examine the content validity of these computer-based health surveillance models with respect to standard diagnostic frameworks. Drawing from a clinical perspective, we will attempt to establish a normative judgment about the strengths of these modern AI applications in the detection of depression. We will perform a systematic review of English and German language publications from 2010 to 2020 in PubMed, APA PsychInfo, Science Direct, EMBASE Psych, Google Scholar, and Web of Science. The inclusion criteria span cohort, case-control, cross-sectional studies, randomized controlled studies, in addition to reports on conference proceedings. The systematic review will exclude some gray source materials, specifically editorials, newspaper articles, and blog posts. Our primary outcome is self-reported depression, as expressed on social media. Secondary outcomes will be the types of AI methods used for social media depression screen, and the clinical validation procedures accompanying these methods. In a second step, we will utilize the evidence-strengthening Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, Study type (PICOS) tool to refine our inclusion and exclusion criteria. Following the independent assessment of the evidence sources by two authors for the risk of bias, the data extraction process will culminate in a thematic synthesis of reviewed studies. We present the protocol for a systematic review which will consider all existing literature from peer reviewed publication sources relevant to the primary and secondary outcomes. The completed review will discuss depression as a self-reported health outcome in social media material. We will examine the computational methods, including AI and machine learning techniques which are commonly used for online depression surveillance. Furthermore, we will focus on standard clinical assessments, as indicating content validity, in the design of the algorithms. The methodological quality of the clinical construct of the algorithms will be evaluated with the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) framework. We conclude the study with a normative judgment about the current application of AI to screen for depression on social media. International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews PROSPERO (registration number CRD42020187874).

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
The popularization of social media has led to the coalescing of user groups around mental health conditions; in particular, depression. Social media offers a rich environment for contextualizing and predicting users' self-reported burden of depression. Modern artificial intelligence (AI) methods are commonly employed in analyzing user-generated sentiment on social media. In the forthcoming systematic review, we will examine the content validity of these computer-based health surveillance models with respect to standard diagnostic frameworks. Drawing from a clinical perspective, we will attempt to establish a normative judgment about the strengths of these modern AI applications in the detection of depression.
METHODS
We will perform a systematic review of English and German language publications from 2010 to 2020 in PubMed, APA PsychInfo, Science Direct, EMBASE Psych, Google Scholar, and Web of Science. The inclusion criteria span cohort, case-control, cross-sectional studies, randomized controlled studies, in addition to reports on conference proceedings. The systematic review will exclude some gray source materials, specifically editorials, newspaper articles, and blog posts. Our primary outcome is self-reported depression, as expressed on social media. Secondary outcomes will be the types of AI methods used for social media depression screen, and the clinical validation procedures accompanying these methods. In a second step, we will utilize the evidence-strengthening Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, Study type (PICOS) tool to refine our inclusion and exclusion criteria. Following the independent assessment of the evidence sources by two authors for the risk of bias, the data extraction process will culminate in a thematic synthesis of reviewed studies.
DISCUSSION
We present the protocol for a systematic review which will consider all existing literature from peer reviewed publication sources relevant to the primary and secondary outcomes. The completed review will discuss depression as a self-reported health outcome in social media material. We will examine the computational methods, including AI and machine learning techniques which are commonly used for online depression surveillance. Furthermore, we will focus on standard clinical assessments, as indicating content validity, in the design of the algorithms. The methodological quality of the clinical construct of the algorithms will be evaluated with the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) framework. We conclude the study with a normative judgment about the current application of AI to screen for depression on social media.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews PROSPERO (registration number CRD42020187874).

Identifiants

pubmed: 34748571
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0259499
pii: PONE-D-21-01438
pmc: PMC8575242
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e0259499

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Priscilla N. Owusu is the founder of Oogtech AI UG, a startup company in Germany, developing digital health technology solutions for diabetic retinopathy. The products incorporate artificial intelligence applications to promote wellbeing including mental health. Dr. Irene Dankwa-Mullan is employed by the commercial company IBM Watson Health, IBM Corporation as the chief health equity officer and deputy chief health officer. IBM Watson Health develops computational technology products for clinical use purposes. No other authors have competing interests. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Références

Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2018 Jul;21(7):437-443
pubmed: 29995530
PLoS One. 2020 Apr 10;15(4):e0226248
pubmed: 32275658
Milbank Q. 1996;74(4):511-44
pubmed: 8941260
Fam Pract. 2012 Jun;29(3):255-63
pubmed: 22016322
Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 01;4:1
pubmed: 25554246
Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2010 Dec;12(6):539-46
pubmed: 20848240
Am J Psychiatry. 2003 Jan;160(1):4-12
pubmed: 12505793
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020 May 12;117(19):10165-10171
pubmed: 32341156
Behav Res Methods. 2019 Aug;51(4):1586-1600
pubmed: 31037606
Sci Rep. 2017 Mar 22;7:45141
pubmed: 28327593
Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2001 Nov-Dec;23(6):311-8
pubmed: 11738461
Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2014 Oct;15(2):37-70
pubmed: 26171956
J Caring Sci. 2015 Jun 01;4(2):165-78
pubmed: 26161370
Qual Life Res. 2010 May;19(4):539-49
pubmed: 20169472
Manag Care Q. 1999 Summer;7(3):56-66
pubmed: 10620960
PLoS One. 2013 Sep 13;8(9):e74610
pubmed: 24058602
Adm Policy Ment Health. 2006 Jan;33(1):65-75
pubmed: 16215660
World Psychiatry. 2014 Feb;13(1):28-35
pubmed: 24497240
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1998 Feb;55(2):109-15
pubmed: 9477922
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2017 May 1;24(3):496-502
pubmed: 27707822
Manag Care. 2004 Jun;13(6 Suppl Depression):6-8
pubmed: 15293765
Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci. 2016 Apr;25(2):113-22
pubmed: 26744309
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2017 Oct;113(4):547-567
pubmed: 28581301
Patient Educ Couns. 2013 Nov;93(2):188-96
pubmed: 23896127
J Affect Disord. 2020 Oct 1;275:112-118
pubmed: 32658812
Asian J Psychiatr. 2020 Aug;52:102066
pubmed: 32302935
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2009 Aug 11;9:59
pubmed: 19671152
NPJ Digit Med. 2020 Mar 24;3:43
pubmed: 32219184
Am J Public Health. 1987 Apr;77(4):445-51
pubmed: 3826462
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2016 Oct;69:313-32
pubmed: 27395342
Br J Clin Psychol. 2005 Jun;44(Pt 2):181-91
pubmed: 16004653
World Psychiatry. 2016 Feb;15(1):26-31
pubmed: 26833601
J Clin Epidemiol. 2011 Dec;64(12):1325-30
pubmed: 21937195
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2000 Mar;57(3):217-22
pubmed: 10711906
J Med Internet Res. 2020 Mar 13;22(3):e13680
pubmed: 32167477

Auteurs

Priscilla N Owusu (PN)

Institute of Global Health, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.

Ulrich Reininghaus (U)

Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.

Georgia Koppe (G)

Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.

Irene Dankwa-Mullan (I)

IBM Watson Health, Maryland, Bethesda, MD, United States of America.

Till Bärnighausen (T)

Institute of Global Health, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, United States of America.

Articles similaires

Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
Humans Adult Male Female Video Games
Humans Blindness Male Female Cross-Sectional Studies

Classifications MeSH