ArticleInternet interventions2026
Validation of the AI mental health Therapy Attitude, Perception, and Intention Scale (AiTAPI).
Article in Internet interventions, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aims to validate the newly designed Attitude Perception and Intention Scale for adopting AI Mental Health Therapy by employing the Classical Test Theory (CTT) approach. Methods: Items formation followed standard procedures with the calculation of the Content Validity Index. The testing and validation samples were gathered through online and face-to-face cross-sectional survey using a self-reported questionnaire. The scale underwent Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). Other psychometric examinations were applied for the reliability and convergency/divergency validity of the three subscales. Results: Factor analyses confirmed that a three-factor model of the scale fit the data well, with the highest Eigenvalue of 4.43 for the attitude subscale, explaining 84.4% of the total variance. Model fit statistics indicated the three-factor model fitted well with the data. Both attitude and intention subscale demonstrated satisfactory convergent and discriminant validity in the post CFA analysis, but not for the perception subscale. Both the attitude and intention subscales demonstrated high internal consistency, with Cronbach's alpha values of 0.920, and 0.828 respectively with the inter-item correlation of 0.647 for the perception subscale. All three subscales correlated significantly with mental well-being and coping measures. Conclusions: The results indicated that a three-factor model fits best to the current data. Two of the three subscales have good reliability and validity for measuring the attitude and intention of using AI Mental Health Therapy. However, the perception subscale requires further development.
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.