ArticleGlobal mental health (Cambridge, England)2026
The role of digital mental health resources in encouraging help-seeking: A qualitative study of university students' experiences.
Article in Global mental health (Cambridge, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digital mental health tools are increasingly available to university students, yet evidence remains limited on how Chinese students engage with these resources and how such engagement shapes help-seeking. This exploratory study examined Chinese postgraduate students' lived experiences of using digital mental health tools and the factors influencing engagement and perceived value. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 postgraduate students (aged 23-30) who had used mental health apps, AI chatbots, or online counseling services. Data were analyzed using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. Four themes emerged: accessibility and anonymity lowered barriers to help-seeking; digital tools supported self-regulation but were viewed as complements rather than substitutes for professional care; sustained engagement was limited by impersonal responses, usability issues, credibility concerns, and digital fatigue; and stigma, self-reliance, and peer norms shaped willingness to seek support. Participants also highlighted concerns about safety and escalation pathways. Overall, digital tools may provide timely, low-threshold support, but their impact may be improved through stronger personalization and governance and through blended models that integrate peer and professional care with timely escalation. Given the small, context-specific sample, these results are exploratory and intended to generate hypotheses rather than provide generalizable conclusions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.