PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 6, 2026Scientific Reports0 citationsOpen Access

Early detection of mental health on social media using a hybrid Bi-LSTM–XGBoost model: a comparative study

View Full Paper
HPHeru Syah PutraMMMuhammad Ary MurtiANAstri Novianty

Key Points

  • This research aims to develop a model for early detection of mental health disorders using social media data.
  • Utilized a hybrid Bi-LSTM–XGBoost model for prediction.
  • Dataset obtained from Kaggle and refined for training.
  • Evaluated multiple models against diverse user text samples.
  • Bi-LSTM-XGBoost achieved an accuracy of 90.35% with 0.4320 loss.
  • Other models demonstrated 50-84% accuracy.
  • Six mental health labels were accurately predicted: anxiety, depression, personality disorder, stress, bipolar, and normal.

Abstract

Abstract The case of mental health disorders has been a main topic in the clinical and psychological field. The advancement of computing studies, especially in Natural Language Processing (NLP)—a subset of Machine Learning, created a system of detection that can detect the mental health state of a person in early stage to prevent the eventuality of the worst case. This is crucial since there has been a lot of case of mental health disorder—such as depression and suicide, remains undetected and untreated–especially when the internet usage is more prevalent than ever even among the most vulnerable users, which are the preadolescent users. This study explores the models that can accurately predict mental health disorder with the provided six labels the model can predict. The labels are anxiety, depression, personality disorder, stress, bipolar, and normal. The dataset is gathered from a Kaggle repository which is then processed and refined further for the training process. From multiple evaluations across diverse amount of texts from different users, our Bi-LSTM-XGBoost model outperforms the other models with an accuracy of 0.9035 and 0.4320 loss, while other models fall short within 50–84% accuracy. Further improvement can be made with our model, whether from improving the model’s parameters further or by improving the quantity and quality of the dataset gathered.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Putra et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69faa2b504f884e66b5335dfhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-47015-6
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper