Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41393230›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2025

Depression diagnosis from patient interviews using multimodal machine learning.

Jana Weber, Marcel Weber, Juan Miguel Lopez Alcaraz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jana WeberAI4Health Division, Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany.
Marcel WeberAI4Health Division, Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany.
Juan Miguel Lopez AlcarazAI4Health Division, Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Depression is a major public health concern, affecting an estimated five percent of the global population. Early and accurate diagnosis is essential to initiate effective treatment, yet recognition remains challenging in many clinical contexts. Speech, language, and behavioral cues collected during patient interviews may provide objective markers that support clinical assessment. Methods: We developed a diagnostic approach that integrates features derived from patient interviews, including speech patterns, linguistic characteristics, and structured clinical information. Separate models were trained for each modality and subsequently combined through multimodal fusion to reflect the complexity of real-world psychiatric assessment. Model validity was assessed with established performance metrics, and further evaluated using calibration and decision-analytic approaches to estimate potential clinical utility. Results: The multimodal model achieved superior diagnostic accuracy compared to single-modality models, with an AUROC of 0.88 and a macro F1-score of 0.75. Importantly, the fused model demonstrated good calibration and offered higher net clinical benefit compared to baseline strategies, highlighting its potential to assist clinicians in identifying patients with depression more reliably. Conclusion: Multimodal analysis of patient interviews using machine learning may serve as a valuable adjunct to psychiatric evaluation. By combining speech, language, and clinical features, this approach provides a robust framework that could enhance early detection of depressive disorders and support evidence-based decision-making in mental healthcare.

Indexed as

clinical decision supportdeep learningdepression diagnosisdigital biomarkersmachine learningmultimodal analysis

Identifiers

PMID41393230
PMCPMC12696486

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.