Search

Artificial intelligence (AI) applications in mental health possess immense potential to revolutionize clinical results, yet determining the most optimal strategies remains a persistent difficulty. This research fills this gap by assessing and establishing priorities among various AI-based mental health options. The evaluation is grounded in essential benchmarks: implementation feasibility, economic efficiency, scalability, adherence to ethical standards, user satisfaction, and overall clinical efficacy. A fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) framework, integrating fuzzy TOPSIS and fuzzy ARAS, was utilized to determine the ranking of the alternatives. A hybrid combination of these two approaches was subsequently implemented to reconcile variations in the results, as each methodology highlights distinct evaluative dimensions. Fuzzy TOPSIS, which privileges proximity to the ideal target, positioned the personalization of care (A5) as the primary alternative, yielding a closeness coefficient of 0.50, with user engagement (A2) following at 0.45. Similarly, fuzzy ARAS, which measures aggregate performance, ranked A5 as the leading option, demonstrating a total performance score of Si = 0.90 and a utility degree of Qi = 0.92. The integration of both frameworks offered a well-rounded analysis, wherein A5 maintained its premier ranking because of its superior performance in user satisfaction and clinical outcomes. These findings highlight the critical role that personalization and active engagement play in refining AI-enabled mental health platforms. This indicates that customized, patient-centric strategies are vital for maximizing therapeutic efficacy and sustaining user commitment.