Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40421378›Full record

ArticleAI and ethics2025

Keeping an AI on the mental health of vulnerable populations: reflections on the potential for participatory injustice.

Giorgia Pozzi, Michiel De Proost

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AI and ethics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Giorgia PozziDelft University of Technology, Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Jaffalaan 5, Delft, 2628BX The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8928-5513
Michiel De ProostGhent University, Faculty of Arts and Philosophy, Department of Philosophy and Moral Sciences, Blandijnberg 2, Gent, B-9000 Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-0545-8515

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Considering the overall shortage of therapists to meet the psychological needs of vulnerable populations, AI-based technologies are often seen as a possible remedy. Particularly smartphone apps or chatbots are increasingly used to offer mental health support, mostly through cognitive behavioral therapy. The assumption underlying the deployment of these systems is their ability to make mental health support accessible to generally underserved populations. Hence, this seems to be aligned with the fundamental biomedical principle of justice understood in its

Indexed as

Capability sensitive designConversational AIEpistemic injusticeEpistemology of AIEthics of AIParticipatory injustice

Identifiers

PMID40421378
PMCPMC12103376

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.