Cited by 67Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationDigital Mental Health InterventionsArtificial Intelligence Applications

The Adoption of AI in Mental Health Care–Perspectives From Mental Health Professionals: Qualitative Descriptive Study

Open access
Zhang, Melody, Scandiffio, Jillian, Younus, Sarah, Jeyakumar, Tharshini, Karsan, Inaara, Charow, Rebecca, Salhia, Mohammad, Wiljer, David·2023·JMIR Formative Research

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming the mental health care environment. AI tools are increasingly accessed by clients and service users. Mental health professionals must be prepared not only to use AI but also to have conversations about it when delivering care. Despite the potential for AI to enable more efficient and reliable and higher-quality care delivery, there is a persistent gap among mental health professionals in the adoption of AI. Objective: A needs assessment was conducted among mental health professionals to (1) understand the learning needs of the workforce and their attitudes toward AI and (2) inform the development of AI education curricula and knowledge translation products. Methods: A qualitative descriptive approach was taken to explore the needs of mental health professionals regarding their adoption of AI through semistructured interviews. To reach maximum variation sampling, mental health professionals (eg, psychiatrists, mental health nurses, educators, scientists, and social workers) in various settings across Ontario (eg, urban and rural, public and private sector, and clinical and research) were recruited. Results: A total of 20 individuals were recruited. Participants included practitioners (9/20, 45% social workers and 1/20, 5% mental health nurses), educator scientists (5/20, 25% with dual roles as professors/lecturers and researchers), and practitioner scientists (3/20, 15% with dual roles as researchers and psychiatrists and 2/20, 10% with dual roles as researchers and mental health nurses). Four major themes emerged: (1) fostering practice change and building self-efficacy to integrate AI into patient care; (2) promoting system-level change to accelerate the adoption of AI in mental health; (3) addressing the importance of organizational readiness as a catalyst for AI adoption; and (4) ensuring that mental health professionals have the education, knowledge, and skills to harness AI in optimizing patient care. Conclusions: AI technologies are starting to emerge in mental health care. Although many digital tools, web-based services, and mobile apps are designed using AI algorithms, mental health professionals have generally been slower in the adoption of AI. As indicated by this study’s findings, the implications are 3-fold. At the individual level, digital professionals must see the value in digitally compassionate tools that retain a humanistic approach to care. For mental health professionals, resistance toward AI adoption must be acknowledged through educational initiatives to raise awareness about the relevance, practicality, and benefits of AI. At the organizational level, digital professionals and leaders must collaborate on governance and funding structures to promote employee buy-in. At the societal level, digital and mental health professionals should collaborate in the creation of formal AI training programs specific to mental health to address knowledge gaps. This study promotes the design of relevant and sustainable education programs to support the adoption of AI within the mental health care sphere.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/47847

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • From a patient standpoint, lack of human presence was seen as a limitation due to lack of empathy and emotional connectivity or absence of a human physician to verbally communicate and discuss.

    “From a patient standpoint, the lack of human presence was seen as a limitation due to a lack of empathy and emotional connectivity with another human or simply not having the presence of a human physician to verbally communicate and discuss, such as when using an AI app or chatbot [51,64].”

    From Barriers to and facilitators of artificial intelligence adoption in health care: scoping review (2024) · cites this paper as [51]

    In Results, Theme 1 (page not provided), mental health professionals describe human connection as crucial to care and worry that AI could undermine the client–therapist relationship. The study reports professionals’ concerns about how clients might respond, not patients’ own accounts; it does not specifically identify a lack of empathy or the inability to speak with a human physician as limitations of an app or chatbot. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Lack of and uncertainty surrounding funding are barriers to implementation.

    “The lack of and uncertainty surrounding funding are presented as barriers to implementation [32,51,56].”

    From Barriers to and facilitators of artificial intelligence adoption in health care: scoping review (2024) · cites this paper as [51]

    In Results, Theme 2, the paper reports that participants viewed limited funding as a significant barrier to adopting AI in mental health care. It says funding varies by practice setting, but does not identify uncertainty about funding as a separate barrier. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Skepticism and a lack of understanding were seen as barriers to AI adoption.

    “Skepticism and a lack of understanding were seen as barriers to AI adoption [48,51].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [21]Hanna BS Hanna AS AI-enabled smartphone-based intervention mental health application for university students Proceedings of the Australasian Conference on Information Systems 2021 2021 ACIS 2021 Proceedings December 6-10, 2021 Sydney, Australia

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhang, M., Scandiffio, J., Younus, S., Jeyakumar, T., Karsan, I., Charow, R., Salhia, M., & Wiljer, D.
Affiliations
  • University Health Network (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
Corresponding author
Wiljer, David
Venue
JMIR Formative Research
Published
2023-12-07
Volume
7
Pages
e47847
ISSN
2561-326X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4389435613
Cited by
67
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 30 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 8
FWCI
2.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR Formative Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Government of Canada
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
Keywords
artificial intelligence adoption, mental health services, mental health professionals, attitudes toward AI, artificial intelligence in education, staff training needs, organizational readiness, practice change, self-efficacy, humanized care, AI governance, knowledge translation, digital mental health tools, resistance to technology adoption, social workers, psychiatric nurses, psychiatrists, social work education, organizational change, staff buy-in

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review