RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Precise Language Responses Challenge Easy Rating Scales - Comparing Clinicians’ and Respondents’ Views
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.04.23.22274132
DO 10.1101/2022.04.23.22274132
A1 Sikström, Sverker
A1 Höök, Alfred Pålsson
A1 Kjell, Oscar
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/04/27/2022.04.23.22274132.abstract
AB Background Closed-ended rating scales are the most used response format for researchers and clinicians to quantify mental states, whereas in natural contexts people communicate with natural language. The reason for using such scales is that they are typically argued to be more precise in measuring mental constructs, whereas the respondents’ views as to what best communicates mental states are frequently ignored.Methods We assessed respondents’ (N = 304) degree of depression using rating scales, descriptive words, selected words, and free text responses and probed the respondents and clinicians (N = 40) for their attitudes to the response formats across twelve dimensions related to the precision of communicating their mental states and the ease of responding.Results Respondents found free text to be more precise (e.g., precision d’ = .88, elaboration d’ = 2.0) than rating scales, whereas rating scales were rated as easier to respond to (e.g., easier d’ = – .67, faster d’ = –1.13). Respondents preferred the free text responses to a greater degree than rating scales compared to clinicians.Conclusions These finding supports the idea that future assessment of mental health can be aided by computational method based on text data.Competing Interest StatementSverker Sikstrom and Oscar Kjell are shareholders of WordDiagnostic ABFunding StatementMarianne och Marcus Wallenbergs Stiftelse (MMW-2021.0058). “AI-based language models for improving diagnostics, monitoring, and outcome of depression and anxiety”. Vinnova. Fo?rba?ttrad diagnostisering av mental ha?lsa med beskrivande ord och artificiell intelligens. (2018-02007). Kamprad Foundation. Förbättrad diagnostik för psykisk ohälsa hos äldre: implementering av beslutsstöd baserat på; beskrivande ord och artificiell intelligens, ref # 20180281Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The study was evaluated by the Etikprovningsnamden (https://etikprovningsmyndigheten.se/) in Sweden with the decision that the study does not need an ethical approval; however, the advice was that they did not have any ethical concern with study (EPN Dnr 2020-00730). This is in accordance with the Swedish Ethical Review Act (SFS 2003:460).I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe data includes texts describing personal information of mental health and can therefore not be shared due to ethical reasons.