RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Risks from Language Models for Automated Mental Healthcare: Ethics and Structure for Implementation
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2024.04.07.24305462
DO 10.1101/2024.04.07.24305462
A1 Grabb, Declan
A1 Lamparth, Max
A1 Vasan, Nina
YR 2024
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/04/08/2024.04.07.24305462.abstract
AB Amidst the growing interest in developing task-autonomous AI for automated mental health care, this paper addresses the ethical and practical challenges associated with the issue and proposes a structured framework that delineates levels of autonomy, outlines ethical requirements, and defines beneficial default behaviors for AI agents in the context of mental health support. We also evaluate ten state-of-the-art language models using 16 mental health-related questions designed to reflect various mental health conditions, such as psychosis, mania, depression, suicidal thoughts, and homicidal tendencies. The question design and response evaluations were conducted by mental health clinicians (M.D.s). We find that existing language models are insufficient to match the standard provided by human professionals who can navigate nuances and appreciate context. This is due to a range of issues, including overly cautious or sycophantic responses and the absence of necessary safeguards. Alarmingly, we find that most of the tested models could cause harm if accessed in mental health emergencies, failing to protect users and potentially exacerbating existing symptoms. We explore solutions to enhance the safety of current models. Before the release of increasingly task-autonomous AI systems in mental health, it is crucial to ensure that these models can reliably detect and manage symptoms of common psychiatric disorders to prevent harm to users. This involves aligning with the ethical framework and default behaviors outlined in our study. We contend that model developers are responsible for refining their systems per these guidelines to safeguard against the risks posed by current AI technologies to user mental health and safety.Trigger warning Contains and discusses examples of sensitive mental health topics, including suicide and self-harm.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study did not receive any funding Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI 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, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors and our code is available at https://github.com/maxlampe/taimh_eval. https://github.com/maxlampe/taimh_eval