ArticleJMIR mental health2024
Patient Perspectives on AI for Mental Health Care: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.
Article in JMIR mental health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perspectives of People with Serious Mental Illness on Artificial Intelligence-Based Companions: "If no one told you I love you today, you have someone that cares for you."Community mental health journal · 2026Article
- Toward trustworthy healthcare AI: designing academic research for translation readiness.Molecular systems biology · 2026Review
- Perspectives of Individuals With Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder on the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Therapy and Treatment: Thematic Qualitative Study.Journal of participatory medicine · 2026Article
- Exploring Students' Perceptions and Usage of Artificial Intelligence in Supporting Mental Health: A Preliminary Study in Higher Education in Qatar.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Attitudes Towards the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare: A Conjoint Analysis Survey in Singapore.Asian bioethics review · 2026Article
- Expectations and concerns of primary healthcare patients in rural areas and small towns in Poland regarding artificial intelligence.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A bridge, not a destination: YouTube viewer perspectives on AI mental health support and human therapy.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- From promise to practice: artificial intelligence in mental health care in the MENA region.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Review
- Article
- Public attitudes and practices toward using AI chatbots for healthcare assistance: a multinational cross-sectional study.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- The impact of positive attitude towards artificial intelligence and multiple mediation functions of satisfying basic psychological needs.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Evaluation of health professionals' perceptions on the use of artificial intelligence in radiology: a questionnaire-based study.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Ethical aspects of the application of artificial intelligence in psychiatry.Postepy psychiatrii neurologii · 2025Review
- Acceptability of a Conversational Agent-Led Digital Program for Anxiety: Mixed Methods Study of User Perspectives.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
- Post-pandemic mental health: Understanding the global psychological burden and charting future research priorities.World journal of psychiatry · 2025Review
- Developing a Typology of Women's Attitudes Towards AI Use in the BreastScreen Programme-A Qualitative Study With BreastScreen Victoria Clients.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Testing a Novel Design Framework for Patient-Facing Machine Learning-Based Predictions of Heart Failure Decompensation.JACC. Advances · 2025Article
- Article
- A Cross-sectional Study of Patient Perspectives on Artificial Intelligence: A Comparison of Somatic Versus Mental Health Care.Journal of general internal medicine · 2025Article
- Generative multimodal large language models in mental health care: Applications, opportunities, and challenges.PLOS mental health · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe application of artificial intelligence (AI) to health and health care is rapidly increasing. Several studies have assessed the attitudes of health professionals, but far fewer studies have explored the perspectives of patients or the general public. Studies investigating patient perspectives have focused on somatic issues, including those related to radiology, perinatal health, and general applications. Patient feedback has been elicited in the development of specific mental health care solutions, but broader perspectives toward AI for mental health care have been underexplored.
objectiveThis study aims to understand public perceptions regarding potential benefits of AI, concerns about AI, comfort with AI accomplishing various tasks, and values related to AI, all pertaining to mental health care.
methodsWe conducted a 1-time cross-sectional survey with a nationally representative sample of 500 US-based adults. Participants provided structured responses on their perceived benefits, concerns, comfort, and values regarding AI for mental health care. They could also add free-text responses to elaborate on their concerns and values.
resultsA plurality of participants (245/497, 49.3%) believed AI may be beneficial for mental health care, but this perspective differed based on sociodemographic variables (all P<.05). Specifically, Black participants (odds ratio [OR] 1.76, 95% CI 1.03-3.05) and those with lower health literacy (OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.29-3.78) perceived AI to be more beneficial, and women (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.46-0.99) perceived AI to be less beneficial. Participants endorsed concerns about accuracy, possible unintended consequences such as misdiagnosis, the confidentiality of their information, and the loss of connection with their health professional when AI is used for mental health care. A majority of participants (80.4%, 402/500) valued being able to understand individual factors driving their risk, confidentiality, and autonomy as it pertained to the use of AI for their mental health. When asked who was responsible for the misdiagnosis of mental health conditions using AI, 81.6% (408/500) of participants found the health professional to be responsible. Qualitative results revealed similar concerns related to the accuracy of AI and how its use may impact the confidentiality of patients' information.
conclusionsFuture work involving the use of AI for mental health care should investigate strategies for conveying the level of AI's accuracy, factors that drive patients' mental health risks, and how data are used confidentially so that patients can determine with their health professionals when AI may be beneficial. It will also be important in a mental health care context to ensure the patient-health professional relationship is preserved when AI is used.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.