Is This Chatbot Safe and Evidence-Based? A Call for the Critical Evaluation of Generative AI Mental Health Chatbots

The proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI)-based mental health chatbots, such as those on platforms like OpenAI's GPT Store and Character. AI, raises issues of safety, effectiveness, and ethical use; they also raise an opportunity for patients and consumers to ensure AI tools clearly communicate how they meet their needs. While many of these tools claim to offer therapeutic advice, their unregulated status and lack of systematic evaluation create risks for users, particularly vulnerable individuals. This viewpoint article highlights the urgent need for a standardized framework to assess and demonstrate the safety, ethics, and evidence basis of AI chatbots used in mental health contexts. Drawing on clinical expertise, research, co-design experience, and the World Health Organization's guidance, the authors propose key evaluation criteria: adherence to ethical principles, evidence-based responses, conversational skills, safety protocols, and accessibility. Implementation challenges, including setting output criteria without one "right answer," evaluating multiturn conversations, and involving experts for oversight at scale, are explored. The authors advocate for greater consumer engagement in chatbot evaluation to ensure that these tools address users' needs effectively and responsibly, emphasizing the ethical obligation of developers to prioritize safety and a strong base in empirical evidence.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Participatory Medicine
Published
2025-04-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2196/69534
Citations
9
Primary Topic
Digital Mental Health Interventions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
13.90
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Is This Chatbot Safe and Evidence-Based? A Call for the Critical Evaluation of Generative AI Mental Health Chatbots

Ramesh Perera‐Delcourt, Eoin Travers, Acacia C. Parks, P. Carl Mullan et al.
9 citations
Journal of Participatory Medicine
Digital Mental Health Interventions
13.90
article

Is This Chatbot Safe and Evidence-Based? A Call for the Critical Evaluation of Generative AI Mental Health Chatbots

Ramesh Perera‐Delcourt, Eoin Travers, Acacia C. Parks, P. Carl Mullan, Marcos Economides, Max Major
article en
9 citations

Abstract

The proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI)-based mental health chatbots, such as those on platforms like OpenAI's GPT Store and Character. AI, raises issues of safety, effectiveness, and ethical use; they also raise an opportunity for patients and consumers to ensure AI tools clearly communicate how they meet their needs. While many of these tools claim to offer therapeutic advice, their unregulated status and lack of systematic evaluation create risks for users, particularly vulnerable individuals. This viewpoint article highlights the urgent need for a standardized framework to assess and demonstrate the safety, ethics, and evidence basis of AI chatbots used in mental health contexts. Drawing on clinical expertise, research, co-design experience, and the World Health Organization's guidance, the authors propose key evaluation criteria: adherence to ethical principles, evidence-based responses, conversational skills, safety protocols, and accessibility. Implementation challenges, including setting output criteria without one "right answer," evaluating multiturn conversations, and involving experts for oversight at scale, are explored. The authors advocate for greater consumer engagement in chatbot evaluation to ensure that these tools address users' needs effectively and responsibly, emphasizing the ethical obligation of developers to prioritize safety and a strong base in empirical evidence.

Journal of Participatory MedicineVol. 17
London Borough of Islington (GB)
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Digital Mental Health Interventions
13.90
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.