ArticleJAMA network open2026
Generative AI Use and Depressive Symptoms Among US Adults.
Article in JAMA network open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Associations of artificial intelligence use at work with psychological distress, loneliness, and life satisfaction among employed US adults.Preventive medicine reports · 2026Article
- Problematic Reliance on Generative AI in an Anxious Young Adult: Case Report.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Leveraging AI Tools to Express Gratitude.Technology, mind, and behavior · 2026Article
- A clinically validated framework for auditing AI chatbot behavior in mental health interactions.Nature medicine · 2026Article
- Review
- Trends in perception of generative AI in healthcare by US adult demographics and political identity.Health affairs scholar · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in traumatic stress treatment: The TRUST framework for ethical development, clinical applications, and research advancement.Journal of traumatic stress · 2026Review
- Emulated trial of artificial intelligence use and subsequent depressive outcomes in a survey of US adults.BMJ mental health · 2026Article
- Technostress in the Era of Generative Artificial Intelligence: Mental Health Implications in Medical Education.Psychiatry investigation · 2026Article
- Error in Byline.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Generative Artificial Intelligence Use and Adolescent Mental Health.Current pediatrics reports · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedError in Byline.2026
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Generative artificial intelligence (AI) has rapidly entered mainstream use in the US, but its association with mental health has not been characterized. Objective: To examine the associations of the extent and type of generative AI use among US adults with negative affective symptoms in a large, nationally representative sample. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study used data from a 50-state US internet nonprobability survey conducted between April and May 2025. Survey respondents were aged 18 years and older. Data were analyzed in August 2025. Exposure: Participants self-reported generative AI and social media use. Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcome of interest, negative affect, was measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire 9-item (PHQ-9). Results: There were 20 847 unique participants, with mean (SD) age 47.3 (17.1) years and 10 327 (49.5%) female, 10 386 (49.8%) male, and 134 (0.6%) nonbinary participants; 2152 participants (10.3%) reported using AI at least daily, including 1053 participants (5.1%) who reported daily use and 1099 participants (5.3%) who reported use multiple times per day. Among participants who used daily or more frequently, 1033 (48.0%) reported use for work, 246 (11.4%) for school, and 1875 (87.1%) for personal applications. In survey-weighted regression models, daily or more frequent AI use was significantly more common among men, younger adults, those with higher education and income, and those in urban settings. Greater AI use was associated with greater levels of depressive symptoms in sociodemographic-adjusted regression models: (daily use: β = 1.08 [95% CI, 0.55-1.62]; multiple times per day: β = 0.86 [95% CI, 0.35-1.37]) compared with nonuse, and with greater likelihood of reporting at least moderate depressive symptoms (odds ratio [OR], 1.29 [95% CI, 1.15-1.46]); similar patterns were observed for anxiety and irritability. The highest estimates were observed among individuals using AI for personal use (β = 0.31 [95% CI, 0.10-0.52]) and those aged 25 to 44 years (β = 1.22 [95% CI, 0.70-1.74]) or 45 to 64 years (β = 1.38 [95% CI, 0.72-2.05]). Conclusions and Relevance: This survey study found that AI use was significantly associated with greater depressive symptoms, with magnitude of differences varying by age group. Further work is needed to understand whether these associations are causal and explain heterogeneous effects.
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.