AI tool nears psychiatrist-level accuracy

by UTHealth Houston

edited by Sadie Harley, reviewed by Robert Egan

Sadie Harley

Scientific Editor

Meet our editorial team
Behind our editorial process

Robert Egan

Senior Editor

Meet our editorial team
Behind our editorial process Editors' notes

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies. Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

proofread

The GIST Add as preferred source

UTHealth Houston researchers have developed an artificial intelligence system that can perform a mental health evaluation at nearly the same level of accuracy as a team of psychiatrists. The results of their work, done in collaboration with Yale University and published in npj Mental Health Research, bring the team a step closer to deploying the model in educational and clinical settings.

"The AI tool we built can perform a diagnostic evaluation on a patient that is almost as good as a team of psychiatrists. It's very impressive," said co-first author Hammza Hamoudi, MD, postdoctoral research fellow in the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at McGovern Medical School at UTHealth Houston.

The team combined pretrained neural networks in a system called Qwen3-Omni with custom software they developed to analyze video recordings of patients' speech, tone of voice and behavior. The resulting system brings together observations across visits and generates written explanations for its mental status assessments.

Senior author Cesar Soutullo, MD, Ph.D., vice chair and chief of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry in the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at McGovern Medical School, said the ultimate goal is to supplement, rather than replace, the work of psychiatrists.

"The point isn't, 'Is this AI as good as a psychiatrist with 30 years of experience?'" said Soutullo, who holds a John S. Dunn Professorship at McGovern Medical School. "The point is that both of them are doing different things, and they have strengths and weaknesses on both sides. Why pick one? You can use both."

The team said they hope the system could eventually be used as an educational tool or as a supplement for early-career clinicians or clinicians who don't have psychiatry training.

"Just imagine you send this to a rural pediatrician who is seeing patients by themselves, and they can get this as an enhancement of their training," Soutullo said. "That could be really good, because we could potentially detect symptoms that otherwise could be missed by clinicians who are not fully trained."

Testing against psychiatric teams

The AI model was evaluated using video recordings of standardized patients undergoing mental status examinations, a mental health evaluation that serves a similar purpose as a physical exam. The standardized patients portrayed cases of schizophrenia, obsessive-compulsive disorder and bipolar disorder at different severity levels.

As well as teams of psychiatrists from UTHealth Houston and Yale, the model classified the standardized patients across 10 criteria: mood, appearance, behavior and cooperation, perceptions, speech, suicidality, the presence of delusions, obsessions or compulsions, and coherence and speed of thought processes.

The diagnoses from the psychiatrists were then compared with the AI model's diagnoses.

The AI model was tested on its overall diagnosis as well as how it performed across each of the 10 individual criteria. While the tool made some mistakes on individual criteria, like the patient's appearance or fine motor movements, the tool's overall diagnosis was consistently accurate.

Teaching through AI errors

The team said the next step is to train the AI model to become more accurate at classifying individual criteria. For now, however, the tool has significant educational potential.

"It was equally good at observations, but not very good at some domains that involve the reasoning that a psychiatrist is doing," said co-first author Benson Mwangi Irungu, Ph.D., assistant professor in the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at McGovern Medical School.

"Even the AI's mistakes could become teaching tools. Students could compare its assessments with those of experienced clinicians, examine where the reasoning went wrong, and learn how to avoid similar errors in their own clinical assessments."

More information

Benson Mwangi et al, Human vs. AI clinical assessment: benchmarking a multimodal foundation model against multi-center expert judgment on the mental status examination, npj Mental Health Research (2026). DOI: 10.1038/s44184-026-00245-y

Clinical categories

PsychiatryPsychology & Mental health Provided by UTHealth Houston Who's behind this story?

Sadie Harley

BSc Life Sciences & Ecology. Microbiology lab background with pharmaceutical news experience in oil, gas, and renewable industries. Full profile →

Robert Egan

Bachelor's in mathematical biology, Master's in creative writing. Well-traveled with unique perspectives on science and language. Full profile →

Citation: AI tool nears psychiatrist-level accuracy (2026, September 17) retrieved 17 September 2026 from https://medicalxpress.com/news/2026-09-ai-tool-nears-psychiatrist-accuracy.html This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.