ArticleJMIR mental health2025
Artificial Intelligence in Mental Health Services Under Illinois Public Act 104-0054: Legal Boundaries and a Framework for Establishing Safe, Effective AI Tools.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Disclosure is not documentation: an open science framework for documenting generative AI use in scholarly research and publication workflows.Research integrity and peer review · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in traumatic stress treatment: The TRUST framework for ethical development, clinical applications, and research advancement.Journal of traumatic stress · 2026Review
- Automated Safety Testing and Reporting Application for Conversational Safety Monitoring of Generative AI Tools for Mental Health: Development and Validation Study.JMIR mental health · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Unlabelled: Artificial intelligence (AI) applications in mental health have expanded rapidly, and consumers are already using freely available generative AI models for self-guided mental health support despite limited clinical validation. In August 2025, Illinois enacted Public Act 104-0054, the first state statute in the United States to explicitly define and regulate the use of AI in psychotherapy services, establishing boundaries around administrative support, supplementary support, and therapeutic communication. While the Act clarifies several aspects of AI use in therapy, it also leaves important gray areas, such as whether AI-generated session summaries, psychoeducation, or risk-flagging functions should be considered therapeutic communication. Drawing on the history of empirically supported treatments in psychology, we argue that a framework of evidence, safety, fidelity, and legal compliance could help determine when AI tools should be integrated into clinical care. This approach provides a concrete pathway for balancing patient protection with responsible innovation in the rapidly evolving field of mental health AI tools.
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.