ArticleChild and adolescent mental health2026
Debate: Conversational AI and young people's mental health-friend or foe? A case for designing conversational AI as a bridge to youth mental health support.
Article in Child and adolescent mental health, 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.
- Editorial: Technology is in our ecology.Child and adolescent 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Conversational AI is now deeply embedded in adolescents' mental health help-seeking and emotional lives, creating both risks and a rare population health opportunity. This debate piece argues that the key question for researchers and implementers to consider is no longer whether adolescents should use general-purpose chatbots for mental health support, but rather how scientists, regulators, and technology companies should shape these systems to reduce harm and promote constructive action. At present, built-in chatbot responses to user expressions of distress often emphasize detection, refusal, or crisis referral, strategies that may protect developers but can fail to meet adolescents' immediate needs. At the same time, open-ended, pseudo-therapeutic interactions with untested agents can reinforce risk, dependency, and inaccurate or harmful beliefs about mental health and help-seeking. We propose that general-purpose conversational AI platforms are well-positioned to function as bridges to evidence-based support, rather than as replacements for formal therapy or treatment. Brief, bounded interventions, including digital single-session interventions, offer a promising model for responding to moments of need while preserving adolescent agency. Ethical AI design should prioritize safeguards, empirical testing, and pathways to evidence-based care.
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.