Evidence mapPaperPMID 41836276Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2025

Exploring the application boundaries of LLMs in mental health: a systematic scoping review.

Jinhua Yang, Ting Liu, Yiming Taclis Luo, Tianyue Niu, Patrick Pang, Ao Xiang, Qin Yang

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Jinhua YangThe School of Humanities, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
Ting LiuFaculty of Applied Sciences, Macao Polytechnic University, Macao, Macau SAR, China.
Yiming Taclis LuoFaculty of Applied Sciences, Macao Polytechnic University, Macao, Macau SAR, China.
Tianyue NiuSchool of Digital Technology and Innovation Design, Jiangnan University, Wuxi, China.
Patrick PangFaculty of Applied Sciences, Macao Polytechnic University, Macao, Macau SAR, China.
Ao XiangInformation Security and Assurance, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ, United States.
Qin YangScience in Computer Science, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The rapid evolution of large language models (LLMs) has ushered in a new era of artificial intelligence (AI) with unprecedented capabilities in understanding and generating human-like text. This progress has sparked a burgeoning interest in applying LLMs across diverse fields, including healthcare. However, the use of LLMs in mental health remains a complex area that demands rigorous investigation. This systematic scoping review aims to explore the current landscape of LLM applications in mental health, identify key research trends and gaps, and delineate the ethical and practical boundaries, thereby providing a comprehensive framework for future research and clinical practice. Methods: This study adheres to the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. A comprehensive search was conducted across eleven databases (Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, Medline, CINAHL, Cochrane, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, ScienceDirect, APA PsycInfo, and Google Scholar). A total of 29 articles were ultimately included in the study. Results: The application of LLMs in mental health is strategically focused on high-throughput screening and clinical augmentation. The application landscape is characterized by domain specialization, with the focus shifting from general models to specialized BERT models to achieve higher clinical accuracy, particularly for high-prevalence disorders such as depression and high-risk conditions. Data analysis is powered by massive, unstructured corpora from social media, supplemented by the systematic incorporation of structured clinical knowledge. However, significant limitations exist, including insufficient cultural sensitivity in non-Western contexts, challenges in capturing longitudinal patient history, and critical risks related to model value alignment and the generation of clinically misleading information. Conclusion: LLMs have emerged as sophisticated "Mental Health Agents" with immense potential for providing personalized, knowledge-guided interventions. The core challenge for future development is to transcend basic functionality and achieve clinical rigor. Future research must prioritize deep specialization into psychological models, enhance multimodal integration for comprehensive patient assessment, and urgently develop robust ethical and cultural adaptation frameworks to ensure the models are safe, globally equitable, and reliable for clinical deployment, thereby fulfilling their potential to alleviate the global mental health resource crisis.

Indexed as

large language modelLLMSmental healthmental illnesssystematic scoping review

Identifiers

PMID41836276
PMCPMC12983331

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.