Raluca Nicoleta TRIFU1, Bogdan NEMEȘ1*, Carolina BODEA-HAȚEGAN2, Doina COZMAN1 *nemes.bogdan@umfcluj.ro 1Iuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania 2Babes-Bolyai Univ…

Despite the high global prevalence of depressive and anxiety disorders, access to early clinical assessment remains limited for many. Although this field has grown rapidly, existing reviews have focused primarily on technical performance, with limited systematic attention to whether current models meet the prerequisites for clinical implementation. This scoping review mapped methodological approaches across this domain and evaluated clinical readiness using five predefined indicators: sample size adequacy, external validation, prospective data collection, real-world evaluation, and model explainability. Searches of PubMed, Web of Science, and IEEE Xplore (March 2026) identified 2463 records; 34 studies (37 dataset evaluations) were included. The majority of studies (91%) were published from 2022 onwards. Depression was the primary target in 91% of studies, while only one study addressed anxiety. Hand-crafted acoustic features were the most frequent (57%), while classical machine learning was the most common model type (32%). External validation was conducted in only 32% of evaluations and real-world testing in 8%. Clinical readiness was classified as Low in 24%, Moderate in 65%, and High in 11% of evaluations. No evaluation met all five indicators simultaneously. These findings apply primarily to voice-based depression screening; 36 of 37 evaluations targeted depression, and the evidence base for anxiety disorders is limited to a single evaluation, precluding comparable characterisation for that condition. The principal challenges to clinical implementation are insufficient external validation, reliance on laboratory conditions, narrow linguistic coverage, and inconsistent metric reporting. The framework applied in this scoping review provides a replicable structure for assessing the clinical validity of AI-driven psychiatric screening tools.

One of the special human qualities is the compassion shown towards our fellow, in special situations, people who live certain states determined by the moments of life they go through. Self-compassion refers to the ability to show compassion, understanding and protection to oneself. It is operationalized by researcher Kristin Neff. Self-efficacy, proposed by Albert Bandura, refers to the perception of self and is related to the belief in one's own abilities, in one's own ability to solve situations. The interest of the study aims the relationship between self-compassion and self-efficacy in the case of a distinct category, that of therapists, professionally faced with situations that require personal resources. Methods: The level of self-compassion was assessed with the Self-Compassion Scale, 26 items, proposed by Kristin Neff. The level of self-efficacy was assessed using the New General Self-Efficacy Scale, the 8-item scale proposed by Gilad Chen & co (2001). Both questionnaires were distributed electronically. The data obtained were statistically analyzed and interpreted. Results: In the professional categories investigated, there are underline links and relations between the two constructs, with professional implications. The results show (1) Therapists have high values in assessing selfefficacy; (2) Therapists have high values of self-compassion; (3) Therapists have a high level of self-compassion and a low level of self-criticism as indicated by the self-compassion sub-scales; (4) There is a direct relationship between self-efficacy and self-compassion; (5) Therapists with high level of self-compassion also have a high level of self-efficacy (6) The level of self-efficacy is influenced by age and professional experience. (7) The level of self-compassion is influenced by age and professional experience Conclusion: The two concepts discussed are important in relation to certain professional categories and under the auspices of situations considered stressful and with emotional burden.

Background and aims. Resilience encompasses factors promoting effective functioning in the context of adversity. Data regarding resilience in the wake of accidental trauma is still scarce. The aim of the current study is to comparatively assess adaptive, life – promoting factors in persons exposed to motor vehicle accidents (MVA) vs. persons exposed to other types of accidents, and to identify psychological factors of resilience and vulnerability in this context of trauma exposure.Methods. We assessed 93 participants exposed to accidents out of 305 eligible patients from the Clinical Rehabilitation Hospital and Cluj County Emergency Hospital. The study used Reasons for Living Inventory (RFL) and Life Events Checklist. Scores were comparatively assessed for RFL items, RFL scale and subscales in participants exposed to motor vehicle accidents (MVA) vs. participants exposed to other life – threatening accidents.Results. Participants exposed to MVA and those exposed to other accidents had significantly different scores in 7 RFL items. Scores were high in 4 out of 6 RFL subscales for both samples and in most items comprising these subscales, while in the other 2 subscales and in some items comprising them scores were low.Conclusions. Low fear of death, physical suffering and social disapproval emerge as risk factors in persons exposed to life – threatening accidents. Love of life, courage in life and hope for the future are important resilience factors after exposure to various types of life – threatening accidents. Survival and active coping beliefs promote resilience especially after motor vehicle accidents. Coping with uncertainty are more likely to foster resilience after other types of life – threatening accidents. Attachment of the accident victim to family promotes resilience mostly after MVA, while perceived attachment of family members to the victim promotes resilience after other types of accidents.