ReviewNeuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology2026
AI in geriatric psychiatry: precision meets human experience.
Review in Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Neuropsychiatric illness in the later years of life: summary and synthesis.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) and robotics are rapidly transforming geriatric psychiatry, offering powerful tools for early detection, personalized treatment, and enhanced care delivery. As the global population ages, these technologies promise not only greater efficiency but also new avenues for delivering scalable, accessible mental health support. However, as AI increasingly engages with domains once considered uniquely human-emotional intelligence, decision-making, and interpersonal connection-it raises deeper questions about the boundary between AI-simulated interaction and authentic human connection. This review examines the intersection of computational precision and existential complexity, emphasizing how theoretical frameworks such as the Theory of Computing (TOC) and Theory of Mind (ToM) can guide ethical and human-centered integration. While AI systems may convincingly simulate empathy or companionship, they cannot share subjective experience, vulnerability, or existential depth. By contrasting computational precision with the irreducible aspects of human complexity, we advocate for a transdisciplinary approach that embraces both the transformative potential of technology and the irreplaceable richness of human connection-especially in the later stages of life, when questions of purpose, mortality, and selfhood become most profound.
Identifiers
41571986What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.