Design and Challenges of Mental Health Assessment Tools Based on Natural Language Interaction

October 20, 2025 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› UbiComp Companion

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Yixue Cai, Xiyan Su, Dongpeng Yao, Rongduo Han, Nan Gao, Haining Zhang arXiv ID 2510.18158 Category cs.HC: Human-Computer Interaction Citations 0 Venue UbiComp Companion Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
Mental health assessments are of central importance to individuals' well-being. Conventional assessment methodologies predominantly depend on clinical interviews and standardised self-report questionnaires. Nevertheless, the efficacy of these methodologies is frequently impeded by factors such as subjectivity, recall bias, and accessibility issues. Furthermore, concerns regarding bias and privacy may result in misreporting in data collected through self-reporting in mental health research. The present study examined the design opportunities and challenges inherent in the development of a mental health assessment tool based on natural language interaction with large language models (LLMs). An interactive prototype system was developed using conversational AI for non-invasive mental health assessment, and was evaluated through semi-structured interviews with 11 mental health professionals (six counsellors and five psychiatrists). The analysis identified key design considerations for future development, highlighting how AI-driven adaptive questioning could potentially enhance the reliability of self-reported data while identifying critical challenges, including privacy protection, algorithmic bias, and cross-cultural applicability. This study provides an empirical foundation for mental health technology innovation by demonstrating the potential and limitations of natural language interaction in mental health assessment.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Human-Computer Interaction

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted