Department of Social Science and Language, Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore, India.
MEAL, Habitat for Humanity India, Mumbai, India.
JMIR Form Res. 2024 Nov 28;8:e64380. doi: 10.2196/64380.
BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence (AI) has become increasingly important in health care, generating both curiosity and concern. With a doctor-patient ratio of 1:834 in India, AI has the potential to alleviate a significant health care burden. Public perception plays a crucial role in shaping attitudes that can facilitate the adoption of new technologies. Similarly, the acceptance of AI-driven mental health interventions is crucial in determining their effectiveness and widespread adoption. Therefore, it is essential to study public perceptions and usage of existing AI-driven mental health interventions by exploring user experiences and opinions on their future applicability, particularly in comparison to traditional, human-based interventions. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore the use, perception, and acceptance of AI-driven mental health interventions in comparison to traditional, human-based interventions. METHODS: A total of 466 adult participants from India voluntarily completed a 30-item web-based survey on the use and perception of AI-based mental health interventions between November and December 2023. RESULTS: Of the 466 respondents, only 163 (35%) had ever consulted a mental health professional. Additionally, 305 (65.5%) reported very low knowledge of AI-driven interventions. In terms of trust, 247 (53%) expressed a moderate level of Trust in AI-Driven Mental Health Interventions, while only 24 (5.2%) reported a high level of trust. By contrast, 114 (24.5%) reported high trust and 309 (66.3%) reported moderate Trust in Human-Based Mental Health Interventions; 242 (51.9%) participants reported a high level of stigma associated with using human-based interventions, compared with only 50 (10.7%) who expressed concerns about stigma related to AI-driven interventions. Additionally, 162 (34.8%) expressed a positive outlook toward the future use and social acceptance of AI-based interventions. The majority of respondents indicated that AI could be a useful option for providing general mental health tips and conducting initial assessments. The key benefits of AI highlighted by participants were accessibility, cost-effectiveness, 24/7 availability, and reduced stigma. Major concerns included data privacy, security, the lack of human touch, and the potential for misdiagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: There is a general lack of awareness about AI-driven mental health interventions. However, AI shows potential as a viable option for prevention, primary assessment, and ongoing mental health maintenance. Currently, people tend to trust traditional mental health practices more. Stigma remains a significant barrier to accessing traditional mental health services. Currently, the human touch remains an indispensable aspect of human-based mental health care, one that AI cannot replace. However, integrating AI with human mental health professionals is seen as a compelling model. AI is positively perceived in terms of accessibility, availability, and destigmatization. Knowledge and perceived trustworthiness are key factors influencing the acceptance and effectiveness of AI-driven mental health interventions.
背景:人工智能(AI)在医疗保健领域变得越来越重要,引起了人们的好奇和关注。印度的医生与患者比例为 1:834,AI 有可能缓解巨大的医疗保健负担。公众的看法在塑造态度方面起着至关重要的作用,而这些态度又可以促进新技术的采用。同样,接受人工智能驱动的心理健康干预措施对于确定其有效性和广泛采用至关重要。因此,研究公众对现有人工智能驱动的心理健康干预措施的看法和使用情况,探索用户对其未来适用性的体验和意见,特别是与传统的、基于人的干预措施相比,是至关重要的。
目的:本研究旨在比较传统的、基于人的干预措施,探讨人工智能驱动的心理健康干预措施的使用、看法和接受程度。
方法:2023 年 11 月至 12 月,共有 466 名来自印度的成年参与者通过网络完成了一项关于使用和感知人工智能驱动的心理健康干预措施的 30 项调查。
结果:在 466 名受访者中,只有 163 人(35%)曾咨询过心理健康专业人士。此外,305 人(65.5%)表示对人工智能驱动的干预措施知之甚少。在信任方面,247 人(53%)表示对人工智能驱动的心理健康干预措施有中等程度的信任,而只有 24 人(5.2%)表示高度信任。相比之下,114 人(24.5%)表示高度信任,309 人(66.3%)表示中度信任;242 人(51.9%)表示高度信任,309 人(66.3%)表示中度信任;与对人工智能驱动的干预措施表示担忧的 50 人(10.7%)相比,242 人(51.9%)报告了与使用基于人的干预措施相关的高度耻辱感。此外,162 人(34.8%)对人工智能驱动的干预措施的未来使用和社会接受度表示乐观。大多数受访者表示,人工智能在提供一般心理健康提示和进行初步评估方面可能是一个有用的选择。参与者强调的人工智能的主要好处包括可及性、成本效益、24/7 可用性和减少耻辱感。主要关注点包括数据隐私、安全、缺乏人性化和潜在的误诊。
结论:人们普遍缺乏对人工智能驱动的心理健康干预措施的了解。然而,人工智能作为预防、初步评估和持续心理健康维护的可行选择具有潜力。目前,人们更倾向于信任传统的心理健康实践。耻辱感仍然是获得传统心理健康服务的一个重大障碍。目前,人性化仍然是基于人的心理健康护理不可或缺的一个方面,人工智能无法取代。然而,将人工智能与人类心理健康专业人员相结合被视为一种引人注目的模式。人工智能在可及性、可用性和去耻辱化方面得到了积极的评价。知识和感知可信度是影响人工智能驱动的心理健康干预措施接受度和有效性的关键因素。
JMIR Form Res. 2024-11-28
J Med Internet Res. 2025-3-21
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2021-7-20
JMIR Ment Health. 2024-10-11
JMIR Ment Health. 2024-9-18
J Med Internet Res. 2020-7-13
Medicina (Kaunas). 2024-6-4
J Med Internet Res. 2025-4-2
JMIR Hum Factors. 2024-1-17
Indian J Psychiatry. 2023-3
Implement Res Pract. 2022-7-11
JAMA Netw Open. 2022-5-2
Indian J Psychiatry. 2022