[AI-Supported Systems in Mental Health Care: Digital Innovation or Loss of Human Care?]

IF 0.8 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Andreas Posa
{"title":"[AI-Supported Systems in Mental Health Care: Digital Innovation or Loss of Human Care?]","authors":"Andreas Posa","doi":"10.1055/a-2928-0255","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>The increasing implementation of AI-supported systems in mental healthcare raises complex ethical, clinical, and societal questions. This manuscript examines the opportunities, risks, and limitations of such technologies, taking into account relational process factors as well as clinical outcomes and real-world conditions of care delivery. AI-supported systems can help bridge waiting times, provide low-threshold psychoeducational interventions, promote motivation, symptom stabilization, and treatment engagement, and facilitate access for underserved or difficult-to-reach patient populations. They offer flexible, location- and time-independent support, strengthen self-efficacy, and may help reduce stigma-related barriers. At the same time, several risks must be considered: potential limitations in the therapeutic alliance between patients and therapists, parasocial substitution, increased social isolation, the emergence of a potential two-tier healthcare system, and ethical challenges associated with unforeseen deteriorations in patients' conditions. Evidence-based studies, including randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses, demonstrate moderate but consistent improvements in symptoms of depression, anxiety, and loneliness, as well as positive effects in resource-limited settings and waiting-list contexts. The manuscript emphasizes that the effectiveness of AI systems can only be fully realized through their integration with human therapeutic support, ethical reflection, and appropriate structural implementation conditions. The aim is a differentiated, evidence-based, and ethically informed integration in which AI systems complement rather than replace the therapeutic relationship, thereby ensuring equitable access to care, quality of therapeutic relationships, and sustainable health outcomes alike.</p>","PeriodicalId":47315,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapie Psychosomatik Medizinische Psychologie","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychotherapie Psychosomatik Medizinische Psychologie","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2928-0255","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: The increasing implementation of AI-supported systems in mental healthcare raises complex ethical, clinical, and societal questions. This manuscript examines the opportunities, risks, and limitations of such technologies, taking into account relational process factors as well as clinical outcomes and real-world conditions of care delivery. AI-supported systems can help bridge waiting times, provide low-threshold psychoeducational interventions, promote motivation, symptom stabilization, and treatment engagement, and facilitate access for underserved or difficult-to-reach patient populations. They offer flexible, location- and time-independent support, strengthen self-efficacy, and may help reduce stigma-related barriers. At the same time, several risks must be considered: potential limitations in the therapeutic alliance between patients and therapists, parasocial substitution, increased social isolation, the emergence of a potential two-tier healthcare system, and ethical challenges associated with unforeseen deteriorations in patients' conditions. Evidence-based studies, including randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses, demonstrate moderate but consistent improvements in symptoms of depression, anxiety, and loneliness, as well as positive effects in resource-limited settings and waiting-list contexts. The manuscript emphasizes that the effectiveness of AI systems can only be fully realized through their integration with human therapeutic support, ethical reflection, and appropriate structural implementation conditions. The aim is a differentiated, evidence-based, and ethically informed integration in which AI systems complement rather than replace the therapeutic relationship, thereby ensuring equitable access to care, quality of therapeutic relationships, and sustainable health outcomes alike.

人工智能支持的精神卫生保健系统:数字创新还是人类护理的丧失?]
摘要:越来越多的人工智能支持系统在精神卫生领域的应用引发了复杂的伦理、临床和社会问题。本文考察了这些技术的机会、风险和局限性,并考虑到相关过程因素以及临床结果和现实世界的护理条件。人工智能支持的系统可以帮助缩短等待时间,提供低门槛的心理教育干预措施,促进动机、症状稳定和治疗参与,并为服务不足或难以接触到的患者群体提供便利。它们提供灵活的、地点和时间无关的支持,增强自我效能,并可能有助于减少与羞耻感相关的障碍。与此同时,必须考虑几个风险:患者和治疗师之间治疗联盟的潜在限制,副社会替代,社会隔离增加,潜在双层医疗保健系统的出现,以及与患者病情不可预见的恶化相关的伦理挑战。包括随机对照试验和荟萃分析在内的循证研究表明,在抑郁、焦虑和孤独症状方面,它有适度但持续的改善,在资源有限的环境和等待名单的环境中也有积极作用。该论文强调,人工智能系统的有效性只有通过与人类治疗支持、伦理反思和适当的结构实施条件相结合才能充分实现。目标是有区别的、循证的和符合伦理的整合,其中人工智能系统补充而不是取代治疗关系,从而确保公平获得护理、治疗关系的质量和可持续的健康结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
11.10%
发文量
89
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书