The reviewed record of science sign in
Pith

arxiv: 2501.01305 · v1 · pith:MUZHXPCG · submitted 2025-01-02 · cs.CL

Large Language Models for Mental Health Diagnostic Assessments: Exploring The Potential of Large Language Models for Assisting with Mental Health Diagnostic Assessments -- The Depression and Anxiety Case

Reviewed by Pith T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 kernel pith:MUZHXPCGrecord.jsonopen to challenge →

classification cs.CL
keywords diagnosticmodelsassessmentsanxietyhealthlanguagelargellms
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly attracting the attention of healthcare professionals for their potential to assist in diagnostic assessments, which could alleviate the strain on the healthcare system caused by a high patient load and a shortage of providers. For LLMs to be effective in supporting diagnostic assessments, it is essential that they closely replicate the standard diagnostic procedures used by clinicians. In this paper, we specifically examine the diagnostic assessment processes described in the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) for major depressive disorder (MDD) and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) questionnaire for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). We investigate various prompting and fine-tuning techniques to guide both proprietary and open-source LLMs in adhering to these processes, and we evaluate the agreement between LLM-generated diagnostic outcomes and expert-validated ground truth. For fine-tuning, we utilize the Mentalllama and Llama models, while for prompting, we experiment with proprietary models like GPT-3.5 and GPT-4o, as well as open-source models such as llama-3.1-8b and mixtral-8x7b.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Can We Trust LLMs for Mental Health Screening? Consistency, ASR Robustness, and Evidence Faithfulness

    cs.CL 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Phi-4 and Gemma-2-9B maintain high intra-model consistency (ICC > 0.89) and ASR robustness for HADS scoring while Llama-3.1-8B degrades sharply, with all models showing score-evidence dissociation.