Scholarlink

Purpose of Review <p>This review examines the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in psychiatry in the past 5 years across four domains: screening; outcome prediction; risk and relapse prediction; and psychotherapy.</p> Recent Findings <p>Machine learning models applied to questionnaires, electronic health records, neuroimaging, and digital phenotyping data demonstrate promising results for predicting symptom trajectories, relapse risk and treatment response, but external and clinical validation is rare. Randomized controlled trials provide some evidence for AI-enabled clinical decision support, but only preliminary evidence for chatbot-delivered psychotherapy. Some preliminary evidence for chatbots in screening exists. Ethical risks, including automation bias, model opacity and socioemotional harms, complicate integration into practice.</p> Summary <p>Current evidence only supports AI’s role as a complement to clinical expertise. To realize safe integration of AI into clinical practice, future work should focus on prospective, multi–site trials with active comparators, external validation across diverse populations, transparent reporting, and governance frameworks that prioritize explainability, oversight, and equity.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

The Use of Artificial Intelligence for Personalized Treatment in Psychiatry

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年12月29日

查看全文
  • Sara Jalali,
  • Qiong You,
  • Victoria Xu,
  • Langfan Chen,
  • Jonathan Zini,
  • Tihare Zamorano,
  • Yangyu Luo,
  • Timothy Friesen,
  • Gabriel James Fontana,
  • David Benrimoh

摘要

Purpose of Review

This review examines the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in psychiatry in the past 5 years across four domains: screening; outcome prediction; risk and relapse prediction; and psychotherapy.

Recent Findings

Machine learning models applied to questionnaires, electronic health records, neuroimaging, and digital phenotyping data demonstrate promising results for predicting symptom trajectories, relapse risk and treatment response, but external and clinical validation is rare. Randomized controlled trials provide some evidence for AI-enabled clinical decision support, but only preliminary evidence for chatbot-delivered psychotherapy. Some preliminary evidence for chatbots in screening exists. Ethical risks, including automation bias, model opacity and socioemotional harms, complicate integration into practice.

Summary

Current evidence only supports AI’s role as a complement to clinical expertise. To realize safe integration of AI into clinical practice, future work should focus on prospective, multi–site trials with active comparators, external validation across diverse populations, transparent reporting, and governance frameworks that prioritize explainability, oversight, and equity.