ArticleJMIR human factors2026
Adolescent Perceptions of an Online Safety Chatbot: Survey Study.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
backgroundAdolescents face a variety of potential harms in the online environment, including exposure to distressing illegal material, cyberbullying, image-based abuse, and "sextortion." Various agencies provide on-demand helpline and information services for children and adolescents to support them with navigating online (and offline) harms.
objectiveThis study examined whether a chat-based conversational agent (chatbot) might be a useful additional tool for meeting the needs of adolescents at risk from online harms. We developed a prototype chatbot-including both conversational and menu-driven user options-and evaluated users' trust in the chatbot. In this context, trust relates to perceptions of the chatbot's usability and the value of the information and support it provides.
methodsParticipants (n=224; mean age 16.8 years) interacted with the chatbots and evaluated them in terms of user trust: perceived usability and utility (ie, relevance of support resources provided).
resultsMost participants (conversational chatbot: 141/224, 63% and menu-driven chatbot: 142/224, 63%) showed a willingness to click on the chatbots' recommended support links. Participants with higher trust in the chatbots were more likely to click the links for recommended support services (with extreme evidence for large effects: δ=0.73, 95% credible interval [CrI] 0.46-1.00 and δ=0.78, 95% CrI 0.50-1.07, for the conversational and menu-driven chatbots, respectively; Bayes factor [BF
conclusionsChatbots represent a promising additional tool to help adolescents access mental health-related support services and navigate online harms. However, establishing trust is critical.
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.