ReviewFrontiers in psychiatry2025
Effectiveness of artificial intelligence chatbots on mental health & well-being in college students: a rapid systematic review.
Review in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The use of chatbots as interventions for mental health conditions: scoping review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Pooled it
- AI-Guided Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Depression and Anxiety: Bridging the Mental Health Treatment Gap Through Digital Psychiatry.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Child and Adolescent Psychiatry: A Narrative Review of Recent Clinical Applications and Ethical Considerations.Current psychiatry reports · 2026Review
- Behavioral intention to use mental health chatbots in Saudi Arabia: a cross-sectional UTAUT-based study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Mental health chatbots and their technical features: A systematic review of reviews and a thematic analysis.Global mental health (Cambridge, England) · 2026Review
- The augmented clinician as a framework for human-AI collaboration in mental healthcare.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in college students' mental health education: opportunities, challenges, and strategic responses.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Review
- Development and validation of the AI-assisted psychoemotional regulation scale (ERP-IA-6).Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Mental health disorders among college students have surged in recent years, exacerbated by barriers such as stigma, cost associated with treatment, and limited access to mental health providers. Artificial intelligence (AI)-driven chatbots have emerged as scalable, stigma-free tools to deliver evidence-based mental health support, yet their efficacy specifically for college populations remains underexplored. Objective: This systematic rapid review evaluates the effectiveness of chatbots in improving mental health outcomes (e.g., anxiety, depression) and well-being among college students while identifying key design features and implementation barriers. Methods: Four databases (PubMed, PsycInfo, Applied Science & Technology Source, ACM Digital Library) were searched for studies published between 2014 and 2024. Two reviewers independently screened articles using predefined PICO criteria, extracted data and assessed quality via the PEDro scale. Included studies focused on chatbot interventions targeting DSM-5-defined mental health conditions or well-being in college students. Results: Nine studies (n=1,082 participants) were included, with eight reported statistically significant improvements in anxiety (e.g., GAD-7 reductions), depression (e.g., PHQ-9 scores), or well-being. Effective chatbots frequently incorporated cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), daily interactions, and cultural personalization (e.g., 22% depression reduction with Woebot; p<0.05). However, heterogeneity in study quality (PEDro scores: 1-7), high attrition rates (up to 61%), and reliance on self-reported outcomes limited generalizability. Conclusions: Though the use of chatbots for the improvement of mental health and well-being is promising based on the review's results, future research should prioritize rigorous RCTs, standardized outcome measures (e.g., PHQ-9, GAD-7), and strategies to improve attrition.
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.