Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42295482›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of pediatrics2026

Is it a Reliable Guide or a Source to be Approached with Caution? GenAI in Parents' Information Search Processes Regarding Their Children.

Mustafa Erol, Ahmet Erol

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of pediatrics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Mustafa ErolDepartment of Primary Education Program, Yıldız Technical University, Istanbul, Türkiye. merol@yildiz.edu.tr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1675-7070
Ahmet ErolDepartment of Preschool Education Program, Pamukkale University, Denizli, Türkiye.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7538-952X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is increasingly used by parents to get information on child care and learning. This study examines how parents use GenAI in their information-seeking process related to their children's care and learning. It looks at how this shapes decision-making and how parents emotionally interpret these experiences. Thirty parents of children aged 0-3 participated. Researchers collected data with open-ended qualitative questionnaires and analyzed it through inductive content analysis. Findings showed that parents used generative AI for quick information and guidance during periods of uncertainty, emergencies, or developmental questions. They viewed AI as a helpful resource for health, care, behavior, development, and planning activities. Parents did not always use AI suggestions directly; instead, they evaluated them by considering their experiences, their children's needs, and professional advice. Emotionally, some felt relief, a sense of security, or a sense of being in control, while others felt insecurity, anxiety, or caution. Conclusions: Parents view generative AI as a helpful, easy-to-access resource for child care and learning. They use it most when needing immediate answers or guidance. At the same time, they treat their information with caution by combining it with their own experiences and expert advice. Generative AI now works as a supporting tool for parents, not as a replacement for human judgment or expert help.

Indexed as

Generative Artificial IntelligenceInformation Seeking BehaviorParentsAdultChild, PreschoolDecision MakingFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMaleQualitative ResearchSurveys and QuestionnairesAI-assisted parentingChildrenGenerative artificial intelligenceParents

Identifiers

PMID42295482
PMCPMC13269444

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.