Paper name (year) Findings Drawbacks

[reference link]
~roll no/name.
A Survey on Mental Health 1. According to this 1. The major drawback
Detection in Online Social paper, which considers in this paper is the
Network the SVM model for language barrier, as
(2018) detection, data is it primarily focuses
https:// primarily collected on English.
[Link]/ from Twitter or 2. The survey dataset
42a6/30a420f8ca366267280 Facebook, with should be based on
[Link] English being the main the respondents'
M Sudeep language for data mother tongues.
collection. 3. Geo-location is
2. It mainly focuses on another drawback;
words and their this paper consists
underlying emotions, only of data from
as well as the Malaysia, whereas it
language used in should include data
OSNs. from around the
3. All researchers world.
collected data from 4. The complexity of
Twitter and Facebook natural language and
and calculated the F1 the nuances of
Score and precision. human
4. They also used videos, communication make
audio, and images as text analysis
datasets to improve challenging.
accuracy. Additionally, the
5. Account privacy is one paper only considers
of the common factors. a single type of OSN,
which is Twitter.
Single classifer vs. There is potential for
ensemble machine 1. According to this using deep neural
learning approaches for paper, Gradient networks, but for
mental health Boosting is highly that, we need a large
Prediction promising for the early dataset. The dataset
(2023) prediction and here is collected only
[Link] diagnosis of mental from patients who
article/10.1186/s40708-022- health issues by visit the doctor,
00180-6 professionals. excluding social
M Sudeep 2. In this paper, network platforms.
researchers mainly Additionally, the
compare various ML dataset is limited. It is
methods for mental sometimes hard to
health detection. They decide which method
evaluated the to use based on the
precision, accuracy, F1 score, accuracy,
sensitivity, and F1 or sensitivity when
score for all the ML working with a low
 methods. Here, DNN dataset.
has higher sensitivity Privacy is one of the
than XGBoost. concern here.
3. They found that higher
cross-validation in the
dataset can lead to
more stable models.
They also used a
confusion matrix for
detection. KNN shows
the highest precision
and sensitivity as well.
The dataset in this
paper was mainly
collected from the lab
and individuals with
chronic disorders.
4. They selected
categorical features
and values and tried to
find the AUC score,
with SVM having the
highest score, similar
to logistic regression,
NN, and XGBoost.

-> The study developed a -> The performance of the

deep learning model using model varied significantly
Convolutional Neural due to imbalanced datasets,
A deep learning model for Networks (CNN) and Extreme particularly for less
detecting mental illness Gradient Boosting(XG-Boost) represented disorders like
from user content on social to identify mental illnesses autism.
media. based on social media posts.

[Link] -> Data is collected from -> The model struggled to

articles/s41598-020-68764-y various mental health related accurately measure co-
subreddits communities like morbid conditions, as each
Aahan Thakur r/depression, r/anxiety, classifier was trained on
r/bipolar,r/schizophrenia,r/auti isolated symptoms.
sm,r/BPD.
->The model was not
->Around 488000 posts from validated against other
224000 users were analysed . platforms like twitter and
instagram threads and was
-> CNN outperformed limited to only reddit.
XGBoost in accuracy across
all [Link] balanced
datasets, the model achieved
high scores, e.g., depression
class had a precision of
89.10% and an F1-score of
 79.49%.Imbalanced datasets
(e.g., autism) resulted in lower
F1-scores despite high
accuracy.
Application of Machine 1. This study shows 1. Data quality and bias
Learning Methods in importance of machine are significant
Mental Health Detection: A learning method in challenges, as online
Systematic Review detecting mental social network (OSN)
(2020) health detection data often contain
condition using OSN noise, including
[Link] data such as twitter irrelevant or
abstract/document/9214815 and facebook . misleading content,
M Sudeep 2. Support Vector which makes it
Machines (SVM) and difficult to train
Deep Neural Networks machine learning
(DNN) demonstrate models accurately.
strong performance in 2. Many models are
detecting depression limited to English,
and stress by ignoring linguistic
analyzing text-based and cultural diversity
posts. in mental health
3. Methods like TF-IDF, expression.
LIWC, and N-Gram 3. Privacy and consent
were frequently used remain major
to preprocess and concerns because
identify meaningful analyzing personal
patterns in text data, posts could violate
aiding accurate users' rights, making
classification. it ethically
4. The study shows challenging to adopt
OSNs can such methods widely.
complement traditional
mental health
detection techniques
by providing real-time,
large-scale monitoring
of users’ mental states
across geographies
and languages
1. This paper shows how 1. These data set which
decision tree model is used in model
effective than svm or collected from
any model in order to specific pages those
precision and recall have depression and
anf f1 score to [Link] limits the
detecting depression findings to broader
Depression detection from or mental illness from social media
social facebook user platforms or
network data using comment. populations.
machine learning 2. LIWC tool is used for 2. In liwc has many
Techniques this method which is attributes and utilized
(2018) helpful for analyzing just 21 and omitting
language patterns .it significant features
[Link] broke down user that might be useful
article/10.1007/s13755-018- comments into many for improve the
0046-0 categories like emotion model.
M Sudeep writing style and time 3. Mining user data
related language from social networks
which make it simple raises privacy
to understand the concerns, especially
pattern in their for sensitive topics
message. like mental health.
3. In this paper we can 4. This data set only
analyze that timing is consider only test
one of the factor for comments and
depression which is avoids the image and
AM hours due to video which may also
loneliness and lack of convey the
social interaction. depressive
4. This model achives 60 tendencies.
to 80 % accuracy as
the data collected from
almost 7000
[Link] data is
robust to train and
evaluate machine
learning model.
Predicting Mental Health 1. In this paper the 1. Here data set is
Illness using Machine Stacking model is small only 1259
Learning Algorithms used as it achieved the entries which limits
(2021) highest accuracy the generalization of
among all five models findings to larger
[Link] i.e Logistic populations.
article/10.1088/1742- Regression, K-Nearest 2. Here there is no real
6596/2161/1/012021/meta Neighbor (KNN), world tested data
M Sudeep Decision Tree, and set .these are tested
Random Forest. on controlled dataset.
2. Here the data set is 3. Stacking models
reduced as it doesn't often critisized as its
affect performance difficult to analyze
and emphasizes the and understand.
importance of relevant 4. The study did not
feature selection. explore how the
3. Ml models are shown proposed methods
as effective for could be scaled or
identifying mental integrated into
health issues and have existing healthcare
the potential for frameworks for real-
automate health time applications.
screening for large
 data sets as ROC
analysis shows that all
models have strong
performance between
0.8 to 0.9 .
4. This paper shows
there is a potential for
early detection of
issues.
Mental Health Prediction -> The main objective of > Most research focuses
Using Machine Learning: this research paper is on traditional ML
Taxonomy,Applications, to give an overall models, with less
and Challenges. review of the past exploration of
(2022) research about each advanced deep
mental health problem learning methods.
https://
[Link]/doi/ -> Random Forest and -> Many studies rely on
full/10.1155/2022/9970363 Support Vector small datasets (<100
Machine(SVM) are the subjects), limiting
Aahan Thakur most widely used generalizability and
models for detecting robustness of results.
each mental health
problems.

. -> Deep Learning -> Insufficient external

approaches, although validation leads
underexplored, many projects to
provided high remain in the proof-
accuracy (for e.g. of-concept stage.
94.44% accuracy for
schizophrenia and -> Many machine
96% for depression learning models have
and anxiety in specific not been deployed in
datasets.) real world as there is
a doubt in the
-> Majority of the accuracy and
research uses consistency of the
accuracy as the main model in real world
performance metric. practices

Identifying mental health -> The main objective of -> The study included
status using deep neural this research is to only 25 participants
network trained by visual enable home-based (16 cancer patients
metrics.(2020) mental health and 9 healthy
monitoring, reducing individuals), limiting
 the need for hospital the generalizability of
[Link] visits and offering a the results.
articles/s41398-020-01117-5 patient-friendly
experience. -> As the sample size of
the data is very
-> A deep learning model small there is a high
Aahan Thakur which includes chance of biases
Convolutional Neural may be present in
Networks(CNN),Long the data which can
Short Term lead to overfitting.
Memory(LSTM)
algorithms was used ->The impact of
for this research. individual artworks
on mental health was
-> The proposed model not evaluated,
evaluated mental despite participants
health problems like viewing 18 pieces.
Hope, Anxiety and
Mental Well Being with
an accuracy of
93.81% ,94.76% ,95.0
0% respectively .

-> The study used data

collected through eye-
tracking glasses while
participants viewed
artworks. It showed
that visual metrics
could effectively serve
as inputs for the
model.

Advancements in Machine > ML and DL models -> Data Privacy and

Learning and Deep demonstrated an ethical concerns
Learning for Early improved accuracy in regarding patients
Detection and Management predicting mental data.
of Mental Health Disorder. health conditions like
(2024) Depression ,Bipolar -> Training dataset may
Disorder, include biases which
Schizophrenia by results in
[Link] applying complex data undesirable
2412.06147 from imaging, genetics outcomes.
and behavioural
analysis. -> Technical complexity
Aahan Thakur in integrating various
-> ML models can tailor data types (e.g.
treatments by Imaging and
analyzing unique behavioural
 patient data, leading to assessment).
better outcomes.
-> Integrating the AI-ML
-> Combining multiple models into an
data types, such as existing clinical
genetic, imaging, and workflow is difficult
behavioral information, and requires user
helps create a friendly interfaces.
comprehensive
diagnostic framework.

1. MHMS use multimodal

Mental Health Monitoring sensing (smartphones, 1. Inter-user and intra-
with Multimodal Sensing wearables, external user variance:
and Machine Learning: A sensors) combined Individual variations
Survey - 2018 with machine learning in behavior and
for continuous and
physiology reduce
unobtrusive monitoring
https:// of mental health generalizability.
[Link]/ conditions like 2. Data labeling
science/article/pii/ depression, anxiety, challenges: Ground
S1574119217305692 stress, and bipolar truth acquisition is
disorder. labor-intensive and
Kshitiz Gupta 2. Multimodal systems are prone to biases.
more effective than
. 3. Integration and
single-sensor setups in
accurately detecting clinical validation:
mental states. Limited clinical
3. These systems offer adoption due to
timely interventions, insufficient validation.
lower monitoring costs, 4. Sensor limitations:
and improve access to Hardware constraints
mental health care.
4. Major challenges and intrusiveness
include a lack of hinder usability.
standardization, data
privacy concerns, and
limited clinical
validation.

1. Personal sensing
Personal Sensing: collects data from 1. Privacy Concerns:
Understanding Mental Collecting sensitive
everyday devices like
Health Using Ubiquitous data from devices
smartphones and raises significant
Sensors and Machine wearables to detect privacy and ethical
Learning behaviors, thoughts, issues.
and feelings related to
- 2017 2. Data Complexity:
mental health.
High-dimensional
 2. Layered frameworks are
used to convert raw data from multiple
sensors can be
data into behavioral
difficult to process
https:// markers, focusing on and interpret.
[Link]/ sleep patterns, social
context, mood, and 3. Limited Validation:
content/journals/10.1146/ Lack of large-scale,
stress.
annurev-clinpsy-032816- 3. Personal sensing has diverse studies limits
strong potential for the generalizability
044949 and clinical validation
advancing mental of findings.
Kshitiz Gupta health research and
treatment.
4. Challenges include
issues with
generalizability and
reproducibility of study
results.

1. The 12-month
Mental Disorders Among prevalence of mental 1. Low Treatment
College Students in the disorders among Rates: Only a small
World Health Organization college students is percentage of
World Mental Health 20.3%, with 83.1% of students with mental
Surveys - 2016 cases beginning health disorders
before college. receive treatment.
2. Early Onset of
2. Anxiety disorders are Disorders: Most
https:// the most common mental health issues
[Link]/core/ (11.7%), followed by begin before college,
journals/psychological- mood disorders increasing the risk of
medicine/article/mental- (6.0%), substance academic
disorders-among-college- disorders (4.5%), an if challenges.
students-in-the-world- d behavioral disorders 3. High Dropout Risk:
health-organization-world- (2.8%). Pre-existing
mental-health-surveys- conditions, especially
corrigendum/ 3. Only 16.4% of substance abuse and
B55A60B6699BF066E02B8 students with mental depression, are
414A73158C2 disorders received linked to higher
treatment. dropout rates.
Kshitiz Gupta
4. Pre-matriculation
disorders, especially
substance abuse and
major depression, are
associated with higher
college dropout rates.
 1. Machine learning
Machine Learning techniques are widely 1. Limited and non-
Techniques to Predict used to predict mental standardized
Mental Health Diagnoses: health diagnoses by datasets.
A Systematic Literature analyzing complex
Review - 2024 data from various 2. Need for more
sources, such as longitudinal data.
clinical records, social 3. Ethical and
media, and sensor interpretability issues
https:// data. with deep learning
[Link]/
models
articles/PMC11443461/ 2. Commonly used
algorithms include
Kshitiz Gupta decision trees, support
vector machines
(SVM), neural
networks, and
ensemble methods for
identifying mental
health conditions like
depression, anxiety,
and bipolar disorder.

3. Challenges in this field

include data privacy
concerns, lack of
standardized datasets,
and the need for
clinical validation to
ensure reliable and
accurate predictions.

1. Machine learning (ML)

A Review of Machine and deep learning (DL) 1. Large datasets
methods significantly required for DL.
Learning and Deep
improve the diagnosis
Learning Approaches on of mental health 2. Ethical issues in data
conditions like anonymization.
Mental Health Diagnosis -
depression, anxiety, 3. Noisy datasets
2023 PTSD, and reduce model
schizophrenia, offering performance
higher accuracy than
traditional methods.
2. These models
[Link] effectively integrate
2227-9032/11/3/285 data from electronic
health records,
wearable devices, and
Kshitiz Gupta social media to provide
a comprehensive view
 of mental health.
3. Key challenges include
data quality issues,
limited generalization
across diverse
populations, and
ethical concerns
regarding data privacy.

1. Machine Learning
Classification of Stress via Methods: ExtraTrees 1. Limited
classifier outperformed Generalizability:
Ambulatory ECG and GSR Significant
others with 90.77%
Data (2023) accuracy, and performance gap
Euclidean feature between training
imputation improved (90.77%) and
[https:// challenge dataset
classification.
[Link]/ 2. Dataset Features: (59.23%) indicates
SMILE dataset with poor generalization
paper/classification-of- to unseen data.
ECG and GSR data,
stress-via-ambulatory-ecg] using handcrafted and 2. Data Imbalance and
deep features from Labeling Issues: Self-
CNNs and reported hourly
~Sahil Sahu
transformers. stress levels may not
3. Data Collection and reflect transient
Annotation: Stress stress, leading to
levels self-reported via potential
mobile app, 80:20 split misclassifications.
for training/testing, 3. Missing Data
testing set lacked Challenges: Sensor
labels. detachment and
4. Challenges and movement artifacts
Performance caused missing data;
Disparities: Covariate imputation methods
shift caused a may introduce biases
performance gap, with or inaccuracies.
59.23% performance 4. Lack of
on the challenge Comprehensive
dataset. Feature Analysis:
5. Future Work Additional
Directions: Future physiological signals
research should focus (e.g., heart rate
on reducing covariate variability) and
shift through data contextual data could
integration and improve stress
normalization detection.
techniques. 5. Potential Overfitting:
6. Conclusion: Machine High training
learning is promising performance
for stress detection but suggests the model
may be overfitted,
 faces challenges in limiting its
data variability and effectiveness on real-
missing values. world data.
6. Insufficient
Exploration of
Alternative Models:
The study did not
explore other
advanced techniques
like ensemble
methods or deep
learning for better
performance.
7. Limited Participant
Diversity: Small and
homogeneous
sample (45
participants) reduces
the applicability of
findings to broader
populations.
8. Short Duration of
Data Collection: The
limited data collection
period may not
capture the full
spectrum of stress
experiences; longer
studies are needed.
9. Conclusion:
Addressing these
limitations in future
research could
improve the
robustness,
accuracy, and real-
world applicability of
the model.

1. Machine Learning
Depression Scale Methods Used: 1. Limited Dataset: The
Support Vector DAIC-WOZ dataset
Recognition from Audio, lacks diversity,
Machine (SVM) and
Visual and Text Analysis neural networks were affecting the
used, with 5-fold generalizability to
(2017) broader populations
cross-validation for
optimizing SVM or different cultural
[https:// parameters. contexts.
2. Feature Extraction: 2. Feature Selection:
[Link]/ The study may not
Features were
 extracted from the have explored all
paper/depression-scale- DAIC-WOZ dataset, relevant features,
including visual (facial such as emotional
recognition-from-audio]
data), audio (speech context or nuanced
patterns), and text linguistic factors.
~Sahil Sahu (emotional ratings) 3. Subjectivity in
modalities. Labeling: Reliance
3. Visual Features: on self-reported
Gaussian Mixture measures (e.g.,
Model (GMM) PHQ-8) introduces
clustering on facial potential bias,
data, with statistical affecting model
features like blink rate accuracy in real-
and facial region world applications.
distances. 4. Complexity of
4. Audio Features: Low- Depression: The
level audio features study may not
and a dictionary of capture the full
depression-related complexity of
words analyzed depression by
speech patterns. focusing mainly on
5. Text Features: speech patterns and
Affective Norms for facial expressions.
English Words 5. Model Interpretability:
(ANEW) ratings for Neural networks'
pleasure, arousal, and complexity makes it
dominance were used. difficult to understand
6. Classification Results: how specific features
Combined audio, contribute to
visual, and text depression
features outperformed classification.
baseline results, with 6. Real-time
significant Application: The
improvements (17% feasibility of
for audio, 24.5% for implementing the
video). method in real-time
7. Best Results: settings, considering
Histogram of Oriented computational
Gradients (HOG) and efficiency and data
Local Binary Pattern quality, was not
(LBP) features addressed.
achieved an RMSE of 7. Potential for
7.72 on the validation Overfitting: Concerns
set. about overfitting exist
8. Conclusion: due to multiple
Depressed individuals models being trained
show notable changes without sufficient
in speech, facial validation on
expressions, and head independent
movements, and the datasets.
multimodal approach 8. Ethical
 effectively detects Considerations: The
depression. paper lacks
discussion on ethical
issues like privacy,
consent,
misdiagnosis, and
stigmatization in
automated mental
health assessments.

1. Machine Learning
The Effect of Acute Stress Methods: XGBoost 1. Limited Datasets:
algorithm and SHAP The study used a
on the Interpretability and small number of
explainable AI
Generalization of techniques were used publicly available
for schizophrenia EEG datasets,
Schizophrenia Predictive limiting
classification and
Machine Learning Models model interpretation. generalizability;
2. EEG Datasets: Four larger, more diverse
(2024) datasets could yield
open EEG datasets
were used, including more robust results.
[https:// data from healthy 2. Focus on Specific
controls, acute stress, Conditions: The
[Link]/ research focused on
and schizophrenia
paper/the-effect-of-acute- (rest and task-based). schizophrenia and
3. Impact of Acute acute stress,
stress-on-the] potentially
Stress: Acute stress
during EEG recording overlooking the
~Sahil Sahu significantly affected impact of other
model performance; mental health
removing stressed disorders or
subjects improved comorbidities on
model generalization. EEG data.
4. Stress Artifact 3. Explainable AI
Removal: A novel Techniques: While
approach adjusting SHAP was used for
EEG frequency band model interpretation,
power was proposed further exploration
to remove stress and validation of
artifacts, improving explainable AI
predictive techniques in mental
performance. health research could
5. Feature Importance: strengthen findings.
SHAP analysis 4. Conclusion:
showed that gamma Addressing
band features were limitations related to
most important for dataset size,
schizophrenia condition diversity,
prediction, followed by and explainable AI
alpha and beta bands. validation could
 6. Conclusion: Acute enhance future
stress should be research in EEG-
considered as a based schizophrenia
potential artifact in prediction.
EEG data; the
proposed methods
improve model
reliability and
interpretability for
better patient
outcomes.

1. CNN-LSTM
Toward Knowledge-Driven Architecture: The 1. Limited Dataset:
method uses CNN to Experiments were
Speech-Based Models of conducted on a
learn vowel-based
Depression: Leveraging embeddings, which single dataset (DAIC-
are processed by an WOZ), limiting
Spectrotemporal Variations generalizability to
LSTM to capture
in Speech Vowels (2022) temporal other datasets or
dependencies in real-world scenarios.
speech. 2. Imbalanced Data
[https:// Distribution: The
2. Vowel-based
[Link]/ Information: Focuses dataset has an
on spectrotemporal imbalanced
paper/toward-knowledge- distribution of
variations of five
driven-speech-based- English vowels and a depression and non-
"not a vowel" class, depression samples,
models] potentially affecting
linked to psychomotor
changes in model performance
~Sahil Sahu depression. and introducing bias.
3. Explainability Analysis: 3. Lack of Contextual
A modified version of Information: The
LIME is used to method focuses on
identify vowel vowel-based
information's impact on information and does
model decisions and not incorporate
track depression additional contextual
likelihood over time. or semantic data,
4. Dataset: Experiments which could enhance
used the DAIC-WOZ performance.
dataset, containing 4. Limited Explainability
clinical interviews and Analysis: The
PHQ-8 scores for explainability
depression diagnosis. analysis is limited to
5. Results: The approach vowel information
outperforms baselines and temporal
by incorporating evolution; a more
vowel-based comprehensive
information, analysis could offer
deeper insights.
 highlighting the 5. Absence of
importance of Perceptual
spectrotemporal vowel Experiments: The
variations for study lacks
depression detection. experiments with
6. Conclusion: mental health
Explainability analysis clinicians to evaluate
aids in understanding the method's
the model’s decision- explainability,
making process, usability, and
potentially assisting trustworthiness in
clinicians in real-world settings.
interpreting results. 6. Future Research
Directions: Future
work could involve
validating on multiple
datasets, balancing
data distribution,
adding contextual
information,
improving
explainability, and
involving clinicians in
perceptual
experiments.
1. Deep Learning Model:
DeepBreath: Deep Learning The paper proposes 1. Limited Number of
DeepBreath, a CNN- Participants: The
of Breathing Patterns for study had a small
based model for
Automatic Stress recognizing sample size of 8
psychological stress participants, limiting
Recognition using Low- generalizability; a
levels from breathing
Cost Thermal Imaging in patterns. larger and more
2. Respiration Variability diverse sample is
Unconstrained Settings needed.
Spectrogram (RVS):
(2017) Breathing signals are 2. Lack of Real-World
transformed into RVS Stress Scenarios:
sequences, which Stress tasks were
[https:// conducted in a
capture breathing
[Link]/ dynamics and serve as controlled lab, not
input for the CNN. reflecting real-life
paper/deepbreath-deep- stressors; testing in
3. Data Augmentation
learning-of-breathing] Technique: A natural settings
unidirectional sliding would improve
cropper-based method ecological validity.
~Sahil Sahu
is used to help the 3. No Comparison with
CNN learn from small- Other Physiological
scale datasets and Signals: The study
prevent overfitting. focused on breathing
4. Low-cost Thermal patterns alone;
combining with other
 Imaging: Low-cost physiological
thermal cameras are measures (e.g., heart
used to capture rate, skin
breathing patterns, conductance) could
contributing a new improve accuracy.
dataset labeled with 4. Absence of
stress levels. Longitudinal Data:
5. Stress Induction The study did not
Tasks: Participants assess stress
completed stress- detection over an
inducing cognitive extended period;
tasks (e.g., Stroop long-term monitoring
Test, Mental could reveal stress
Computation) under dynamics.
varying difficulty levels 5. Limited Diversity in
to gather stress- Participant
related data. Demographics: No
6. Performance detailed information
Evaluation: The model on participant
achieves 84.59% backgrounds; a more
accuracy in binary diverse sample could
stress classification highlight individual
and 56.52% in differences in stress
distinguishing three responses.
stress levels, 6. Conclusion:
outperforming shallow Addressing these
learning methods. limitations could
7. Conclusion: The enhance the
research introduces a applicability and
novel approach for robustness of the
stress recognition findings in real-world
using breathing stress detection
dynamics from thermal scenarios.
imaging, RVS
representation, and
data augmentation to
address data
limitations.
1. Model Architecture:
Swin Transformer with Proposed an 1. Limited Dataset
enhanced Swin Diversity: Genius HR
Enhanced Dropout and dataset has minimal
Transformer with
Layer-wise Unfreezing for dropout and layer-wise demographic variety,
unfreezing strategies. risking biased model
Facial Expression predictions.
2. Datasets Used:
Recognition in Mental FER2013, CK+, and 2. Performance Issues:
Genius HR datasets. The model struggles
Health Detection (2024) with subtle and
FER2013 has 48x48
grayscale images, complex emotions
[https:// CK+ contains 920 like "Fear" and
"Surprise."
 labeled images, and 3. Overfitting Risks:
[Link]/ Genius HR is a small Although mitigated,
dataset with 500 smaller datasets like
paper/swin-transformer-
images. CK+ may still limit
with-enhanced-dropout- 3. Preprocessing: real-world
Included resizing, generalization.
and]
normalization (zero 4. Real-world
mean, unit variance), Applicability: The
~Shivangi Sinha and grayscale mental health scoring
conversion. system relies heavily
4. Data Augmentation: on consistent
Techniques like emotion data, which
random horizontal may be impractical in
flips, rotations, and diverse scenarios.
erasing were used to 5. Emotion Mapping
mitigate overfitting. Limitations: Simplistic
5. Loss Function: correlations between
Weighted cross- emotions and mental
entropy loss applied to health might miss
balance class nuanced
imbalances. psychological states.
6. Optimization: AdamW 6. Generalization
optimizer was used for Challenges:
stability and reduced Dependency on
overfitting. small datasets
7. Evaluation Metrics: restricts the model's
Accuracy, precision, applicability to larger,
recall, and F1-score more diverse
were primary metrics; populations.
Grad-CAM 7. Sensitivity to External
visualizations analyzed Factors: Variability in
feature focus. lighting, poses, or
8. Best Model occlusions can still
Performance: Model C impact prediction
with enhanced dropout accuracy.
achieved accuracies of
71.23% on FER2013
and 78.65% on CK+
datasets.
1. ML Techniques: SVM
Application of machine was the most used 1. Dataset Limitations:
algorithm, achieving Small sample sizes
learning techniques in the and lack of diverse
up to 99.2% accuracy;
diagnostic approach of other methods demographics limit
included MGPC, RVM, generalization.
PTSD using MRI 2. Model Interpretability:
MKL, and deep
neuroimaging data: A learning. ML models lacked
2. Input Data: transparency
systematic review (2024) regarding PTSD's
Neuroimaging data
from rs-fMRI and sMRI neural mechanisms.
[https:// 3. Temporal Dynamics:
 were primarily used, Absence of
[Link]/ focusing on functional longitudinal studies
and structural to track trauma's
publication/
connectivity. temporal effects.
379253022_Application_of_ 3. Key Features: 4. High-Risk Groups:
Features like ALFF, Limited focus on
machine_learning_techniq
ReHo, gray/white distinguishing TEHC
ues_in_the_diagnostic_app matter volume, and from HC.
functional network 5. Real-World
roach_of_PTSD_using_MRI
connectivity were Application: Heavy
_neuroimaging_data_A_sy extracted. reliance on controlled
4. Brain Regions: experimental data
stematic_review]
Discriminative regions reduces clinical
included the insula, practicality.
~Shivangi Sinha amygdala, prefrontal 6. Subgroup Analysis:
cortex, hippocampus, Few studies
and posterior cingulate analyzed PTSD
cortex. subtypes like
5. Results: Multimodal dissociative or
approaches combining comorbid variants.
fMRI and sMRI 7. Data Integration:
improved accuracy Lack of integration of
(~90%); MGPC and multimodal
RVM achieved ~80– neuroimaging with
89%. genetic, behavioral,
6. Applications: ML or other clinical
models differentiated biomarkers.
PTSD, TEHC, and HC
with significant
neurobiological
distinctions.
1. Proposed Method:
MM-EMOG: Multi-Label MM-EMOG uses a 1. Data Privacy
multi-label emotion Constraints: Limited
Emotion Graph access to metadata
graph representation
Representation for Mental for mental health and user history
classification. reduces contextual
Health Classification on richness.
2. ML Techniques: Graph
Social Media (2024) Convolutional 2. Emotion Complexity:
Networks (GCNs) Simplistic
combined with BERT aggregation of
[https:// emotions may miss
embeddings for multi-
[Link]/ label emotion learning. nuanced
3. Dataset Features: interpretations.
paper/mm-emog-multi- 3. Dataset Diversity:
Utilized three datasets:
label-emotion-graph] TwitSuicide (Twitter), Focused on English-
CSSRS (Reddit), and language datasets;
Depression (Twitter), non-English
~Shivangi Sinha
with varying post languages were not
lengths and class explored.
4. Scalability
 distributions. Challenges:
4. Lexicons: Incorporated Computational
NRC Emotion Lexicon, resource needs
SenticNet, and TEC increase with dataset
for emotion size and length.
representation. 5. Real-World
5. Key Innovations: Applicability: Does
Employed token- not address user-
document graphs and level mental health
Pointwise Mutual classification,
Information (PMI), TF- focusing only on
IDF, and Jaccard post-level analysis.
similarity for edge 6. Model
construction. Generalization:
6. Performance Metrics: Results may not
Evaluated using generalize to mixed-
accuracy, weighted F1 language posts or
scores, and class- unseen datasets
specific F1 scores, without adaptation.
achieving significant 7. Ethical Concerns:
improvements over Potential misuse in
baselines. profiling individuals
without consent.
1. Model Introduction:
3M-Health: Multimodal 3M-Health is a novel 1. Limited Datasets:
model using text, Experiments
Multi-Teacher Knowledge conducted on four
emotion, and audio
Distillation for Mental modalities for mental datasets, limiting
health detection on insights into
Health Detection (2024) performance across
social media.
2. Datasets: Evaluated diverse platforms and
[https:// on TwitSuicide, conditions.
DEPTWEET, IdenDep, 2. Generalizability:
[Link]/ Uncertainty about
and SDCNL, with
paper/3m-health- variations in size, class model's ability to
distribution, post generalize to larger
multimodal-multi-teacher- and more diverse
length, and source
knowledge] platforms (Twitter, datasets due to small
Reddit). sample sizes.
3. Audio Modality: 3. Temporal Aspects:
~Shivangi Sinha
Utilizes Bark text-to- Study lacks
audio model to consideration of
generate audio from temporal changes in
text, capturing mental states,
emotional cues for missing potential
text-based mental insights from user
health detection. post history.
4. Performance: 4. Explainability:
Outperforms baselines Model's decision-
on all datasets, with making and feature
interpretability are
 notable improvements not thoroughly
on datasets with explored, crucial for
shorter texts and mental health
Reddit-based applications.
datasets. 5. Conclusion: Further
5. Conclusion: research needed to
Demonstrates the validate effectiveness
effectiveness of a on diverse datasets,
multimodal multi- incorporate temporal
teacher approach, analysis, and
emphasizing the enhance model
importance of modality explainability.
selection based on
data characteristics.
1. Machine Learning
Machine Learning Based Methods: Utilized 1. Limited Dataset: The
Random Forest (RF) study focused on
Diagnosis of Binge Eating explicitly healthy
for classification with
Disorder Using EEG an accuracy of individuals, limiting
81.25%, identifying the insights into more
Recordings (2020) advanced BED cases
low theta sub-band
(4.5–6 Hz) as a critical and generalizability
[https:// feature. to broader
2. Data Features: EEG populations.
[Link]/ 2. Diagnosis Ambiguity:
recordings from 203
publication/ participants were Lacked a clear
used, with significant diagnosis within the
341293297_Machine_Learni dataset, relying on
noise removal and
ng_Based_Diagnosis_of_Bi spectral analysis for ‘disinhibition’ scores
feature extraction. as indicators.
nge_Eating_Disorder_Usin 3. Potential Bias:
3. Data Processing:
g_EEG_Recordings] Applied Independent Survey-based
Component Analysis classification could
(ICA) for noise introduce bias,
~Shivangi Sinha
removal and Fast affecting the
Fourier Transform for reliability of results.
frequency analysis, 4. Unexplored ML
dividing EEG signals Approaches: Did not
into 99 fine frequency fully explore modern
bands. ML approaches like
4. Validation: Employed convolutional neural
10-fold cross- networks or other
validation for reliable advanced
accuracy estimation. techniques.
5. Classification Criterion: 5. External Validity: The
Used the ‘disinhibition’ model's external
factor from the Three- validity needs
Factor Eating improvement through
Questionnaire (TFEQ) additional datasets
to distinguish between for broader
applicability.
BED and non-BED 6. Explainability:
participants. Limited exploration of
the interpretability of
the model's
predictions, crucial
for clinical adoption.