Closely tracking changes in depression is important for clinical research and practice. However, intensive longitudinal depression assessment relies on self-report surveys that have major limitations. Scoring depression from natural language with large language models (LLMs) could resolve these shortcomings.
This study tested the validity of depression rated by LLMs from daily video diaries. We studied 108 participants selected for mental health treatment status (45% in treatment). Participants completed a clinical interview and 14-21 days of depression surveys and video diaries.
Daily depression scores were estimated by LLMs from diary transcripts. LLM ratings converged with self-report depression within-person (r = .45;95% CrI[.40, .49]) and when averaged across days for an overall depression score (r = .61;95% CrI[.43,.75]). Averaged LLM ratings correlated with depression symptom severity ascertained by clinical interview (r = .53;95% CrI[.35, .68]).
LLM-rated depression and self-report had similar profiles of associations with daily functioning variables (profile r = .98 within-person; r = .94 between-person). Multivariable regression results showed LLM ratings predicted daily functioning variables (partial \(\beta s\)=|.12 | - | .28 | ) and interview-rated depression (partial \(\beta\)=.33;95% CrI[.07, .58]) over and above self-reports, suggesting LLMs capture clinically-relevant information that self-reports miss. Findings establish a strong foundation for a depression assessment approach that addresses shortcomings of self-reports while satisfying the unique demands of intensive longitudinal monitoring.
This research was supported by grants from the US National Institutes of Health (U01 MH136025; UL1 TR001857; K01 MH130746). No funding was received for this research. Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA Aman Taxali, Mike Angstadt & Chandra Sripada Department of Psychology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA Department of Philosophy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA Weinberg Institute for Cognitive Science, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA Eisenberg Family Depression Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA The authors declare no competing interests.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
