Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly used to detect and predict suicide-related outcomes from social-media data, but the methodological basis and generalizability of this research remain heterogeneous. We conducted a systematic review combining bibliometric analysis with structured document-level synthesis of journal articles indexed in Scopus and Web of Science through 22 May 2026, following PRISMA 2020. A total of 178 studies were included using a 50-field extraction framework. Reddit (51.7%) and Twitter/X (39.3%) were the predominant platforms, while data geography was not reported in 70.8% of studies. Traditional machine learning remained the most frequent model family (69.1%), alongside deep learning (53.9%), Transformer-based models (42.7%), and large language models (9.0%). Suicide-related outcomes and ground-truth sources were heterogeneous. Among studies reporting usable metrics, median F1 was 0.8990 and median AUROC was 0.9480, but external validation was identified in only 26 studies (14.6%). Explainability or interpretability was reported in 58 studies (32.6%); source code was publicly or directly available in 22 (12.4%), and only 14 (7.9%) reported both reusable data and source code. These findings highlight heterogeneous ground-truth practices, limited documented external validation, and uneven reporting of interpretability, ethical procedures, and reusable data and code, constraining assessments of generalizability and reproducibility.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Díaz et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: