ArticleFrontiers in public health2026
Problematic generative AI use and mental health risks among Chinese university students: latent profiles, network structure, and health literacy as a modifiable resource.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has become a routine academic tool for university students, but dysregulated use may co-occur with anxiety, sleep problems, psychological distress, and impaired academic functioning. This study examined GenAI-related digital behavior as a public health issue and assessed whether health literacy and self-regulated learning were associated with lower-risk profiles. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among Chinese university students from six universities in eastern, central, and western China. A total of 2,140 questionnaires were submitted; after four-step data-quality screening, 1,872 valid responses were retained. Measures assessed GenAI-use dysregulation, academic anxiety, sleep problems, psychological distress, health literacy, self-regulated learning, academic engagement, and demographic and use-related covariates. Latent profile analysis identified GenAI-use and mental-health risk profiles. Profile differences were examined using omnibus and Results: A four-profile solution showed the best balance of fit, entropy, class size, and interpretability (entropy = 0.891). The profiles were low-risk adaptive users (39.9%), anxiety-prone dependent users (25.7%), sleep-disrupted overusers (19.8%), and high-risk dysregulated users (14.6%). Confirmatory factor analysis supported the measurement structure of the adapted and selected scales (CFI = 0.958, TLI = 0.951, RMSEA = 0.036, SRMR = 0.041), and Harman's single-factor test did not indicate serious common method bias. Higher health literacy and self-regulated learning were associated with greater odds of low-risk rather than high-risk membership. Network analysis identified loss of control, academic worry, delayed bedtime, and academic avoidance as central or bridge nodes, whereas credibility evaluation and time management showed negative bridge expected influence. Conclusion: GenAI-related digital behavior among university students varied in ways that involved dysregulated use, academic anxiety, sleep problems, distress, and academic functioning. These findings may help universities identify students who report difficulty controlling AI use, academic worry, delayed bedtime, academic avoidance, or trouble setting limits on AI use. They also point to health literacy, self-regulation, and time management as candidate resources for future longitudinal and intervention studies.
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.