Integrating Previous Suicide Attempts, Gender, and Age Into Suicide Risk Assessment Using Advanced Artificial Intelligence Models.

IF 4.5 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Journal of Clinical Psychiatry Pub Date : 2024-10-02 DOI:10.4088/JCP.24m15365
Shiri Shinan-Altman, Zohar Elyoseph, Inbar Levkovich
{"title":"Integrating Previous Suicide Attempts, Gender, and Age Into Suicide Risk Assessment Using Advanced Artificial Intelligence Models.","authors":"Shiri Shinan-Altman, Zohar Elyoseph, Inbar Levkovich","doi":"10.4088/JCP.24m15365","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p></p><p><p><b>Objective:</b> Suicide is a critical global health concern. Research indicates that generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) and large language models, such as generative pretrained transformer-3 (GPT-3) and GPT-4, can evaluate suicide risk comparably to experts, yet the criteria these models use are unclear. This study explores how variations in prompts, specifically regarding past suicide attempts, gender, and age, influence the risk assessments provided by ChatGPT-3 and ChatGPT-4.</p><p><p><b>Methods:</b> Using a controlled scenario based approach, 8 vignettes were created. Both ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT 4 were used to predict the likelihood of serious suicide attempts, suicide attempts, and suicidal thoughts. A univariate 3-way analysis of variance was conducted to analyze the effects of the independent variables (previous suicide attempts, gender, and age) on the dependent variables (likelihood of serious suicide attempts, suicide attempts, and suicidal thoughts).</p><p><p><b>Results:</b> Both ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 recognized the importance of previous suicide attempts in predicting severe suicide risks and suicidal thoughts. ChatGPT-4 also identified gender differences, associating men with a higher risk, while both models disregarded age as a risk factor. Interaction analysis revealed that ChatGPT-3.5 associated past attempts with a higher likelihood of suicidal thoughts in men, whereas ChatGPT-4 showed an increased risk for women.</p><p><p><b>Conclusions:</b> The study highlights ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4's potential in suicide risk evaluation, emphasizing the importance of prior attempts and gender, while noting differences in their handling of interactive effects and the negligible role of age. These findings reflect the complexity of GenAI decision-making. While promising for suicide risk assessment, these models require careful application due to limitations and real-world complexities.</p>","PeriodicalId":50234,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Psychiatry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4088/JCP.24m15365","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Suicide is a critical global health concern. Research indicates that generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) and large language models, such as generative pretrained transformer-3 (GPT-3) and GPT-4, can evaluate suicide risk comparably to experts, yet the criteria these models use are unclear. This study explores how variations in prompts, specifically regarding past suicide attempts, gender, and age, influence the risk assessments provided by ChatGPT-3 and ChatGPT-4.

Methods: Using a controlled scenario based approach, 8 vignettes were created. Both ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT 4 were used to predict the likelihood of serious suicide attempts, suicide attempts, and suicidal thoughts. A univariate 3-way analysis of variance was conducted to analyze the effects of the independent variables (previous suicide attempts, gender, and age) on the dependent variables (likelihood of serious suicide attempts, suicide attempts, and suicidal thoughts).

Results: Both ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 recognized the importance of previous suicide attempts in predicting severe suicide risks and suicidal thoughts. ChatGPT-4 also identified gender differences, associating men with a higher risk, while both models disregarded age as a risk factor. Interaction analysis revealed that ChatGPT-3.5 associated past attempts with a higher likelihood of suicidal thoughts in men, whereas ChatGPT-4 showed an increased risk for women.

Conclusions: The study highlights ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4's potential in suicide risk evaluation, emphasizing the importance of prior attempts and gender, while noting differences in their handling of interactive effects and the negligible role of age. These findings reflect the complexity of GenAI decision-making. While promising for suicide risk assessment, these models require careful application due to limitations and real-world complexities.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
利用先进的人工智能模型将自杀未遂经历、性别和年龄纳入自杀风险评估。
目的:自杀是一个严重的全球健康问题。研究表明,生成式人工智能(GenAI)和大型语言模型,如生成式预训练转换器-3(GPT-3)和 GPT-4,可以与专家相媲美地评估自杀风险,但这些模型使用的标准尚不明确。本研究探讨了提示的变化,特别是有关既往自杀企图、性别和年龄的提示,如何影响 ChatGPT-3 和 ChatGPT-4 提供的风险评估:方法:采用一种基于控制情景的方法,创建了 8 个小故事。ChatGPT-3.5 和 ChatGPT-4 均用于预测严重自杀企图、自杀未遂和自杀想法的可能性。我们进行了单变量 3 方差分析,以分析自变量(以往自杀未遂、性别和年龄)对因变量(严重自杀未遂、自杀未遂和自杀想法的可能性)的影响:结果:ChatGPT-3.5 和 ChatGPT-4 都认识到了以往自杀未遂在预测严重自杀风险和自杀想法方面的重要性。ChatGPT-4 还发现了性别差异,认为男性的风险更高,而这两个模型都忽略了年龄这一风险因素。交互分析显示,ChatGPT-3.5 将男性过去的自杀企图与更高的自杀想法可能性联系在一起,而 ChatGPT-4 则显示女性的自杀风险更高:该研究强调了 ChatGPT-3.5 和 ChatGPT-4 在自杀风险评估方面的潜力,强调了既往自杀未遂和性别的重要性,同时也注意到了它们在处理交互效应方面的差异,以及年龄所起的微不足道的作用。这些发现反映了 GenAI 决策的复杂性。虽然这些模型有望用于自杀风险评估,但由于其局限性和现实世界的复杂性,需要谨慎应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Psychiatry
Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
1.90%
发文量
0
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: For over 75 years, The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry has been a leading source of peer-reviewed articles offering the latest information on mental health topics to psychiatrists and other medical professionals.The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry is the leading psychiatric resource for clinical information and covers disorders including depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, anxiety, addiction, posttraumatic stress disorder, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder while exploring the newest advances in diagnosis and treatment.
期刊最新文献
Efficacy and Safety of Ketamine/Esketamine in Bipolar Depression in a Clinical Setting. Integrating Previous Suicide Attempts, Gender, and Age Into Suicide Risk Assessment Using Advanced Artificial Intelligence Models. Long-Term Changes in Cognition Among Patients With Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders and Different Durations of Illness: A Meta-Analysis. Regression: Understanding What Covariates and Confounds Do in Adjusted Analyses. Diagnostic Assessment via Live Telehealth (Phone or Video) Versus Face-to-Face for the Diagnoses of Psychiatric Conditions: A Systematic Review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1