Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42582721›Full record

ArticlePsychiatric research and clinical practice2026

Artificial Intelligence in Psychiatry: Five Decades of Progress and Persistent Translational Challenges.

Esteban Zavaleta-Monestel, Luis Guillermo Herrera-Jiménez, Sofía Suárez-Sánchez, Sebastián Arguedas-Chacón, Jeaustin Mora-Jiménez, Ricardo Millán-González

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychiatric research and clinical practice, 2026. 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

6 authors.

Esteban Zavaleta-MonestelHealth Research Department Clínica Bíblica San José Costa Rica.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3726-0079
Luis Guillermo Herrera-JiménezDepartment of Pharmacy University of Costa Rica San José Costa Rica.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-9839-7109
Sofía Suárez-SánchezHealth Research Department Clínica Bíblica San José Costa Rica.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9606-111X
Sebastián Arguedas-ChacónHealth Research Department Clínica Bíblica San José Costa Rica.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8547-7745
Jeaustin Mora-JiménezHealth Research Department Clínica Bíblica San José Costa Rica.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-0543-2262
Ricardo Millán-GonzálezDepartment of Medicine University of Costa Rica San José Costa Rica.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-5446-9368

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This review examined the historical development of artificial intelligence (AI) in psychiatry from 1972 to 2025 and identified persistent barriers to clinical translation. Method: The review used a structured source-identification approach across PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, citation tracking, and targeted historical searches. It synthesized sources qualitatively and organized them chronologically. A structured evidence table summarized representative milestones by era, AI paradigm, clinical task, data modality, validation approach, implementation status, and translational limitation. Results: Psychiatric AI evolved from symbolic simulation and rule-based expert systems to connectionist models, supervised machine learning, computational psychiatry, digital phenotyping, multimodal monitoring, digital mental health tools, and large language models. Despite increasing computational sophistication, recurring barriers persisted, including uncertain target validity, diagnostic heterogeneity, limited external validation, poor transportability, interpretability challenges, workflow integration, equity, patient trust, and governance. Across eras, technical progress was cyclical rather than linear, with successive waves reproducing unresolved clinical and implementation challenges. Conclusions: The clinical impact of psychiatric AI will likely depend less on algorithmic novelty alone than on clearer clinical targets, prospective validation, implementation trials, patient-centered evaluation, equity-sensitive generalizability, and mental health-specific governance. Relevance to Clinical Practice: For routine psychiatric care, AI tools require evidence of clinical validity, transportability, workflow compatibility, patient acceptability, equity, and appropriate governance rather than technical performance alone.

Identifiers

PMID42582721
PMCPMC13458306

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.