ArticleWorld journal of pediatrics : WJP2026
Associations between parental generative artificial intelligence health-advice use and child vaccination uptake in Japan: an exploratory cross-sectional study.
Article in World journal of pediatrics : WJP, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundParents increasingly use generative artificial intelligence (AI) for health information, but evidence on parental AI use and childhood vaccination is limited. We examined exploratory associations between regular parental AI health-advice use and childhood vaccination in Japan.
methodsThis cross-sectional study analyzed 2025 nationwide survey data from children aged 1 to 17 years and parents, with a linked 2023-2025 sub-analysis. The exposure was regular parental use of generative AI for health advice at least a few times per month. Outcomes were age-appropriate measles-rubella (MR) vaccination and any mumps, influenza, or coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination. Modified Poisson regression estimated adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) with parent-level clustering and covariates.
resultsAmong 8282 children and 5170 parents, 1278 (15.4%) had regular AI health-advice users as parents. AI use was not associated with age-appropriate MR vaccination (aPR 1.02; 95% CI 0.97-1.09), but was associated with three vaccines. The adjusted rates were 76.6 versus 72.7% (aPR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01-1.10) for mumps, 56.7% versus 49.0% (aPR 1.16, 95% CI 1.08-1.24) for influenza, 40.6% versus 30.9% (aPR 1.31, 95% CI 1.19-1.45) for COVID-19. The COVID-19 association was strongest among parents younger than 30 years (aPR 2.58; 95% CI 1.90-3.50; P for interaction < 0.001). In the linked sub-analysis, these associations persisted after adjustment for an available 2023 household-level prior vaccination marker and attitudes.
conclusionsRegular parental use of generative AI for health advice was associated with mumps, influenza, and COVID-19 vaccination, but not with age-appropriate MR vaccination. These exploratory, cross-sectional findings are observational associations. They may reflect digital health engagement, health information seeking, socioeconomic differences, or favorable attitudes, rather than vaccine-specific AI advice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42881346What 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.