JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools, including large language model (LLM)-based platforms such as ChatGPT, Google Gemini, and Microsoft Copilot, are being adopted across healthcare settings with increasing speed. Despite the increasing popularity of GenAI, empirical data on the extent and nature of adoption by mental health clinicians in routine psychotherapy practice globally remain scarce.

Objective:

This study aimed to characterize current use patterns of GenAI tools among a global sample of practicing mental health professionals, including prevalence of use, specific tools employed, clinical and administrative purposes served, perceived effect on workload, and the institutional context shaping adoption (e.g., encouragement, prohibition, and training).

Methods:

We administered a cross-sectional online survey to a global convenience sample of licensed mental health professionals who provide psychotherapy as part of the scope of their practice (i.e., psychotherapists, psychologists, counsellors, nurses, and psychiatrists). Participants were recruited via professional networks, purposely avoiding the use of social media platforms. Within the survey, we captured GenAI use behaviors in psychotherapy contexts, and demographic and professional background data. Descriptive statistics were analyzed for all variables. Multivariate logistic regression was used to examine demographic and professional predictors of GenAI use.

Results:

A total of 766 mental health professionals who provide psychotherapy from 30 countries completed the survey. Of these, 54.6% (n=418) reported having purposely used at least one GenAI tool in psychotherapy clinical practice. ChatGPT was the most frequently used tool (354/418, 84.7%). The most commonly reported clinical purpose was assisting with treatment planning (175/418, 41.9%), followed by managing administrative tasks (173/418, 41.4%) and generating psychoeducational materials for clients (166/418, 39.7%). 82.8% of AI users reported that these tools reduced their overall work burden. Only 18.1% (139/766) of respondents reported institutional encouragement to use AI tools, while 81.1% (621/766) reported not having received any professional training on AI use. Predictors of AI adoption included younger age and rural practice setting.

Conclusions:

In this global convenience sample survey, GenAI use among mental health professionals in psychotherapy settings is widespread, concentrated in a wide variety of clinical and administrative tasks. Formal training and institutional guidance substantially lag behind current adoption patterns. These findings highlight an urgent need for evidence-based competency frameworks, regulatory clarity, and professional education to support safe and ethically informed integration of AI into clinical mental health practice.