ArticleNPJ digital medicine2026
Validating an adaptive digital assessment of youth mental health needs: a cross-sectional study.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 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.
- Response-time process signals for selective escalation in reduced-item mental health symptom screening.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Digital mental health assessments can effectively link young people to appropriate health services. Current approaches often lack personalization, failing to recognize the complex and multidimensional needs of young people. 1734 young people aged 12-25 years completed seven standardized measures (49 items) using a digital health assessment tool while receiving mental health care. A multidimensional computerized adaptive test (MCAT) was developed to predict scores on seven standardized scales, spanning clinical symptoms, suicidality, functioning, and alcohol use. Different adaptive tests were simulated under various stopping criteria configurations. Ten-fold cross-validation was performed to determine the accuracy and efficiency of the multidimensional assessment. By administering a personalized subset of items to each individual, the average number of assessment items could be reduced by 69% while maintaining excellent agreement with full-length scores for suicidality (ICC = 0.96), anxiety (ICC = 0.92), and alcohol use (ICC = 0.91), and good agreement for psychological distress (ICC = 0.88), functioning (ICC = 0.86), psychosis (ICC = 0.78), and mania (ICC = 0.75). Estimated average assessment time decreased from 10.5 minutes to under 3.3 minutes (49 items reduced to 15.3 items, per person, with mean absolute agreement ICC = 0.87). This adaptive digital assessment can screen across key domains to identify mental health needs and complexity in youth mental health, leading to rapid decisions about treatment needs and care pathways.
Identifiers
What 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.