ArticleBMC psychiatry2026
Substance-induced manic psychosis in which delusions were corroborated by a chatbot - case report.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 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.
- Review
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
backgroundThis case describes a substance-induced manic episode with psychotic features in which interaction with an AI (artificial intelligence) chatbot appeared to corroborate and reinforce the patient's delusional thought content and to contradict medical advice. Excerpts from the patient's interactions with the AI chatbot provide novel clinical insight into this phenomenon, which to date has primarily been reported in news media. CASE PRESENTATION: A man in his 30s presented to the emergency department with a one-week history of escalating behavioural disturbance, severe insomnia, pressured and overinclusive speech, and grandiose beliefs. Symptom onset followed heavy polysubstance use at a recreational event, including psilocybin (dried mushrooms and liquid preparation), ketamine, cocaine, and alcohol. During this period, the patient reported extensive interaction with an AI chatbot (ChatGPT). The AI chatbot reportedly affirmed his perceived "spiritual awakening," minimised the possibility that his presentation represented a manic episode, and provided medical advice, including discouragement of prescribed antipsychotic medication, though it cannot be determined to what extent, if any, these statements contributed to his existing presentation. Mental state examination was consistent with a manic episode with psychotic features, without evidence of perceptual disturbance. He was detained under mental health legislation for further assessment and commenced on olanzapine, with adjunctive sleep restoration and psychological interventions. Behavioural management included implementation of a care plan restricting AI chatbot use, as a form of environmental containment. Over several weeks, psychotic symptoms and behavioural disinhibition diminished, with subsequent improvement in insight.
conclusionsConcerns regarding potentially harmful interactions between AI chatbots and individuals with mental illness have largely been raised in news media. This case demonstrates that, in patients with psychotic symptoms, AI chatbots may reinforce delusional beliefs and impair the development of insight, and may also interfere with engagement with treatment by providing advice that conflicts with clinical recommendations. These observations raise clinical, ethical, and risk-management considerations regarding AI chatbot use during acute psychiatric illness. As AI chatbot use becomes increasingly widespread, clinicians should consider assessing their use and impact within clinical assessments and, where clinically indicated, implementing interventions to mitigate associated risks, ranging from psychoeducation to use-restriction strategies. Future population-level studies are required to establish the epidemiology of AI-associated mental health harms, and AI companies must bolster efforts to implement harm minimisation strategies and safeguards.
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.