ArticleJMIR mental health2025
Seeking Emotional and Mental Health Support From Generative AI: Mixed-Methods Study of ChatGPT User Experiences.
Article in JMIR mental health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Are You Qualified, ChatGPT? Examining Clinical Skills and Competencies of ChatGPT in Delivering Systemic Interventions.Journal of marital and family therapy · 2026Article
- Possible Role and Function of AI Conversational Agents in Dialectical Behavior Therapy for Borderline Personality Disorder: Qualitative Interview Study.JMIR mental health · 2026Article
- AI Use for Mental Health Information and Professional Psychological Help-Seeking Intentions Among Saudi Women: A Cross-Sectional Study.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Generative artificial intelligence-assisted medical self-care and associated factors among undergraduate students at Arsi University, South-Eastern Ethiopia.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- A scoping review on the mental health harms of LLM-based chatbots.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence as a Personal Coach: A Narrative Review of Benefits and Risks in Educational and Health Contexts.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- It Is the Journey, Not the Destination: Moving From End Points to Trajectories When Assessing Chatbot Mental Health Safety.JMIR mental health · 2026Article
- Use of generative AI for health among urban youth in Pakistan: A mixed-methods study.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Mass Media Narratives of Psychiatric Adverse Events Associated With Generative AI Chatbots: Rapid Scoping Review.JMIR mental health · 2026Article
- Seven Desiderata for Ethical Frameworks for AI Mental Health Agents.The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence as a source of psychotherapy-related psychoeducation: a cross-sectional content analysis of information on eye movement desensitization and reprocessing.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Cybersecurity and Privacy Risks of Generative AI Mental-Health Chatbots: A Systematic Review and Regulatory Framework.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) models have emerged as a promising yet controversial tool for mental health. Objective: The purpose of this study is to understand the experiences of individuals who repeatedly used ChatGPT (GenAI) for emotional and mental health support (EMS). Methods: We recruited 270 adult participants across 29 countries who regularly used ChatGPT (OpenAI) for EMS during April 2024. Participants responded to quantitative survey questions on the frequency and helpfulness of using ChatGPT for EMS, and qualitative questions regarding their therapeutic purposes, emotional experiences of using, and perceived helpfulness and rationales. Thematic analysis was used to analyze qualitative data. Results: Most participants reported using ChatGPT for EMS at least 1-2 times per month for purposes spanning traditional mental health needs (diagnosis, treatment, and psychoeducation) and general psychosocial needs (companionship, relational guidance, well-being improvement, and decision-making). Users reported various emotional experiences during and after use for EMS (eg, connected, relieved, curious, embarrassed, or disappointed). Almost all users found it at least somewhat helpful. The rationales for perceived helpfulness include perceived changes after use, emotional support, professionalism, information quality, and free expression, whereas the unhelpful aspects include superficial emotional engagement, limited information quality, and lack of professionalism. Conclusions: Despite the absence of ethical regulations for EMS use, GenAI is becoming an increasingly popular self-help tool for emotional and mental health support. These results highlight the blurring boundary between formal mental health care and informal self-help and underscore the importance of understanding the relational and emotional dynamics of human-GenAI interaction. There is an urgent need to promote AI literacy and ethical awareness among community users and health care providers and to clarify the conditions under which GenAI use for mental health promotes well-being or poses risk.
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.