Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42862709›Full record

ReviewDialogues in clinical neuroscience2027

Artificial Intelligence in suicide prevention: promise, peril, and clinical implications for clinical practice.

Bénédicte Nobile, Philippe Courtet

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Dialogues in clinical neuroscience, 2027. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Bénédicte NobileUniversity of Haifa, Haifa, Israel.ORCID 0000-0002-2570-6996
Philippe CourtetDepartment of Emergency Psychiatry and Acute Care, CHU Montpellier, France, IGF, Univ. Montpellier, CNRS, INSERM, Montpellier, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into psychiatry is progressing rapidly, with promising yet underexplored applications in suicide prevention. While most existing studies have focused on suicide risk prediction, AI could be applied more broadly across the suicide prevention continuum. This review explores AI's potential in improving the detection of suicidal ideation (SI), enhancing clinician training, and expanding patient access to psychotherapeutic support. Studies suggest that AI models may identify SI more sensitively than clinicians by detecting subtle linguistic or semantic cues. Furthermore, AI-based virtual patients have been shown to improve clinicians' confidence and accuracy in suicide risk assessments, particularly when used alongside traditional training methods. On the patient side, CBT-inspired AI tools offer scalable, on-demand support, but most remain unregulated and clinically unvalidated. Despite their perceived empathy and availability, such tools pose ethical and clinical risks. Many patients use AI tools without professional guidance, a trend clinicians often underestimate. This disconnect calls for urgent regulatory oversight and professional engagement. Without clear clinical validation, AI-based tools may evolve outside medical frameworks, exposing vulnerable individuals to preventable harm. Psychiatry must not only adapt but also lead, ensuring that innovation is harnessed responsibly to serve patients with empathy, safety, and scientific rigor.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceSuicide PreventionHumansPsychiatrySuicidal Ideationartificial intelligencelarge language modelssuicidal ideationSuicide

Identifiers

PMID42862709
PMCPMC13660552

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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.