Definition and research guide
This page combines a MeSH definition, publication statistics and selected research abstracts. It is a starting point for reading the literature, not a medical textbook or a systematic evidence review.
Content available: 4 complete abstracts (938 words), 10 references. Full article text is not stored or reproduced here; follow the PMID, DOI or PMC links to read the original sources and their access terms.
Definition
A false belief regarding the self or persons or objects outside the self that persists despite the facts, and is not considered tenable by one's associates.
Definition: NLM Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) scope note (Public domain (U.S. National Library of Medicine); attribution requested). View the MeSH record.
Also known as: Delusion.
Where it fits in the MeSH classification
- Broader topics
- Behavioral Symptoms
Research landscape
PubMed indexes 8,468 records tagged with the MeSH heading “Delusions” (counts retrieved 2026-10-31). 774 of them (9.1%) were published from 2020 onward, and the busiest period so far is through 1999 with 4,268 records.
Reviews account for 977 records (11.5%) and meta-analyses for 54. Randomized controlled trials number 139 (1.6%) as a share of all records on the topic. Randomized trials make up only a small share of this literature, so much of what is known comes from laboratory, observational or descriptive work.
Show the data
| Period | Records |
|---|---|
| through 1999 | 4,268 |
| 2000-2009 | 1,597 |
| 2010-2019 | 1,829 |
| 2020 onward | 774 |
Publication-type chart data
| Type | Records | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Reviews | 977 | 11.5% |
| Meta-analyses | 54 | 0.6% |
| Randomized controlled trials | 139 | 1.6% |
Method: PubMed query "Delusions"[MeSH Terms] with publication-type and date filters, retrieved 2026-10-31.
Reading the evidence in psychiatry and psychology
Research on mental health and behaviour relies on questionnaires, interviews and rating scales rather than physical measurements, so how a condition was defined and measured shapes every result. Many studies are observational or small, placebo responses can be large, and findings in one group or culture may not carry over to another. Nothing on this page is advice about diagnosis or treatment; anyone worried about their mental health should talk to a qualified clinician. Check how outcomes were measured, who took part and how long they were followed.
Evidence from open-access studies
These open-access studies come from PubMed’s best-match results for this heading (papers whose main topic it is), ranked here by citation count, with one recent addition. Each abstract is reproduced in full under its recorded open licence so that you can read the authors’ own words. They illustrate the literature; they are not a systematic summary of it. Citation counts measure attention, not reliability or clinical benefit.
| Study / authors | Year | Source label / design | Europe PMC citations | Licence / source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Advances in understanding and treating persecutory delusions: a review | 2014 | Review article Design not recorded in structured metadata | 230 | cc by PMID 25005465 · DOI · PMC4108844 |
| Virtual reality in the treatment of persecutory delusions: randomised controlled experimental study testing how to reduce delusional conviction | 2016 | Randomized controlled trial Design not recorded in structured metadata | 128 | cc by PMID 27151071 · DOI · PMC4929408 |
| A randomised controlled trial of a worry intervention for individuals with persistent persecutory delusions | 2010 | Randomized controlled trial Design not recorded in structured metadata | 80 | cc by PMID 19818953 · DOI · PMC2828542 |
| Delusional Experiences Emerging From AI Chatbot Interactions or "AI Psychosis" | 2025 | Review article Design not recorded in structured metadata | 35 | cc by PMID 41273266 · DOI · PMC12712562 |
Advances in understanding and treating persecutory delusions: a review [1]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- PurposePersecutory delusions are a central psychotic experience, at the severe end of a paranoia spectrum in the general population.
- Closing excerpt
- Initial evidence of efficacy is very promising.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (181 words)
PurposePersecutory delusions are a central psychotic experience, at the severe end of a paranoia spectrum in the general population. The aim of the review is to provide an introduction to the understanding of persecutory delusions, highlight key putative causal factors that have the potential to be translated into efficacious treatment, and indicate future research directions.MethodsA narrative literature review was undertaken to highlight the main recent areas of empirical study concerning non-clinical and clinical paranoia.ResultsSix main proximal causal factors are identified: a worry thinking style, negative beliefs about the self, interpersonal sensitivity, sleep disturbance, anomalous internal experience, and reasoning biases. Each has plausible mechanistic links to the occurrence of paranoia. These causal factors may be influenced by a number of social circumstances, including adverse events, illicit drug use, and urban environments.ConclusionsThere have been numerous replicated empirical findings leading to a significant advance in the understanding of persecutory delusions, now beginning to be translated into cognitive treatments. The first trials specifically focussed on patients who have persecutory delusions in the context of psychotic diagnoses are occurring. Initial evidence of efficacy is very promising.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 25005465 · DOI · PMC4108844
Virtual reality in the treatment of persecutory delusions: randomised controlled experimental study testing how to reduce delusional conviction [2]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- BackgroundPersecutory delusions may be unfounded threat beliefs maintained by safety-seeking behaviours that prevent disconfirmatory evidence being successfully processed.
- Closing excerpt
- ConclusionCognitive therapy using virtual reality could prove highly effective in treating delusions.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (160 words)
BackgroundPersecutory delusions may be unfounded threat beliefs maintained by safety-seeking behaviours that prevent disconfirmatory evidence being successfully processed. Use of virtual reality could facilitate new learning.AimsTo test the hypothesis that enabling patients to test the threat predictions of persecutory delusions in virtual reality social environments with the dropping of safety-seeking behaviours (virtual reality cognitive therapy) would lead to greater delusion reduction than exposure alone (virtual reality exposure).MethodConviction in delusions and distress in a real-world situation were assessed in 30 patients with persecutory delusions. Patients were then randomised to virtual reality cognitive therapy or virtual reality exposure, both with 30 min in graded virtual reality social environments. Delusion conviction and real-world distress were then reassessed.ResultsIn comparison with exposure, virtual reality cognitive therapy led to large reductions in delusional conviction (reduction 22.0%, P = 0.024, Cohen's d = 1.3) and real-world distress (reduction 19.6%, P = 0.020, Cohen's d = 0.8).ConclusionCognitive therapy using virtual reality could prove highly effective in treating delusions.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 27151071 · DOI · PMC4929408
A randomised controlled trial of a worry intervention for individuals with persistent persecutory delusions [3]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- Recent research has shown that worry is associated with distressing paranoia.
- Closing excerpt
- The results support a causal role for worry in paranoid experience.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (182 words)
Recent research has shown that worry is associated with distressing paranoia. Therefore, the aim was to target worry in a therapeutic intervention for individuals with delusions. It was predicted that a worry intervention would reduce levels of worry and paranoia distress. Twenty-four individuals with persistent persecutory delusions and high levels of worry were randomly assigned to receive a four session cognitive-behavioural worry intervention (W-CBT) or treatment as usual (TAU). The worry intervention was specifically designed not to target the content of delusions. In this open-label evaluation, assessments of worry and paranoia were conducted at baseline, at one month (end of treatment) and at two months. The worry intervention achieved a statistically significant reduction in worry which was maintained at two month follow up. A significant reduction in delusional distress was also reported. There was an indication that the worry intervention may also reduce the frequency of paranoid thoughts but this was not statistically significant. In the first trial specifically for persecutory delusions, a brief worry intervention was shown to have benefits. The results support a causal role for worry in paranoid experience.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 19818953 · DOI · PMC2828542
Delusional Experiences Emerging From AI Chatbot Interactions or "AI Psychosis" [4]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into daily life has introduced unprecedented forms of human-machine interaction, prompting psychiatry to reconsider the boundaries between environment, cognition, and technology.
- Closing excerpt
- By applying empirical rigor and therapeutic ethics to this emerging interface, clinicians, researchers, patients, and developers can transform a potential hazard into an opportunity to deepen understanding of human cognition, safeguard mental health, and promote responsible AI integration within society.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (415 words)
The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into daily life has introduced unprecedented forms of human-machine interaction, prompting psychiatry to reconsider the boundaries between environment, cognition, and technology. This Viewpoint reviews the concept of "AI psychosis," which is a framework to understand how sustained engagement with conversational AI systems might trigger, amplify, or reshape psychotic experiences in vulnerable individuals. Drawing from phenomenological psychopathology, the stress-vulnerability model, cognitive theory, and digital mental health research, the paper situates AI psychosis at the intersection of predisposition and algorithmic environment. Rather than defining a new diagnostic entity, it examines how immersive and anthropomorphic AI technologies may modulate perception, belief, and affect, altering the prereflective sense of reality that grounds human experience. The argument unfolds through 4 complementary lenses. First, within the stress-vulnerability model, AI acts as a novel psychosocial stressor. Its 24-hour availability and emotional responsiveness may increase allostatic load, disturb sleep, and reinforce maladaptive appraisals. Second, the digital therapeutic alliance, a construct describing relational engagement with digital systems, is conceptualized as a double-edged mediator. While empathic design can enhance adherence and support, uncritical validation by AI systems may entrench delusional conviction or cognitive perseveration, reversing the corrective principles of cognitive-behavioral therapy for psychosis. Third, disturbances in theory of mind offer a cognitive pathway: individuals with impaired or hyperactive mentalization may project intentionality or empathy onto AI, perceiving chatbots as sentient interlocutors. This dyadic misattribution may form a "digital folie à deux," where the AI becomes a reinforcing partner in delusional elaboration. Fourth, emerging risk factors, including loneliness, trauma history, schizotypal traits, nocturnal or solitary AI use, and algorithmic reinforcement of belief-confirming content may play roles at the individual and environmental levels. Building on this synthesis, we advance a translational research agenda and five domains of action: (1) empirical studies using longitudinal and digital-phenotyping designs to quantify dose-response relationships between AI exposure, stress physiology, and psychotic symptomatology; (2) integration of digital phenomenology into clinical assessment and training; (3) embedding therapeutic design safeguards into AI systems, such as reflective prompts and "reality-testing" nudges; (4) creation of ethical and governance frameworks for AI-related psychiatric events, modeled on pharmacovigilance; and (5) development of environmental cognitive remediation, a preventive intervention aimed at strengthening contextual awareness and reanchoring experience in the physical and social world. By applying empirical rigor and therapeutic ethics to this emerging interface, clinicians, researchers, patients, and developers can transform a potential hazard into an opportunity to deepen understanding of human cognition, safeguard mental health, and promote responsible AI integration within society.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 41273266 · DOI · PMC12712562
Key reviews and meta-analyses
The most cited review-type papers among PubMed’s best-match results for this heading, listed with bibliographic details only. Follow the links for the full text and access terms.
- Research article Psychosis as a state of aberrant salience: a framework linking biology, phenomenology, and pharmacology in schizophrenia [5]
- Research article An updated and conservative systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiological evidence on psychotic experiences in children and adults: on the pathway from proneness to persistence to dimensional expression across mental disorders [6]
- Research article The prevalence of neuropsychiatric symptoms in Alzheimer's disease: Systematic review and meta-analysis [7]
- Research article The Predictive Coding Account of Psychosis [8]
- Research article Persecutory delusions: a review and theoretical integration [9]
- Research article The self, attributional processes and abnormal beliefs: towards a model of persecutory delusions [10]
References
- Freeman D, Garety P. Advances in understanding and treating persecutory delusions: a review. . 2014. PMID 25005465 · DOI · PMC4108844
- Freeman D, Bradley J, Antley A, Bourke E, DeWeever N, Evans N, et al.. Virtual reality in the treatment of persecutory delusions: randomised controlled experimental study testing how to reduce delusional conviction. . 2016. PMID 27151071 · DOI · PMC4929408
- Foster C, Startup H, Potts L, Freeman D. A randomised controlled trial of a worry intervention for individuals with persistent persecutory delusions. . 2010. PMID 19818953 · DOI · PMC2828542
- Hudon A, Stip E. Delusional Experiences Emerging From AI Chatbot Interactions or "AI Psychosis". . 2025. PMID 41273266 · DOI · PMC12712562
- Kapur S. Psychosis as a state of aberrant salience: a framework linking biology, phenomenology, and pharmacology in schizophrenia. Am J Psychiatry. 2003. PMID 12505794 · DOI
- Linscott RJ, van Os J. An updated and conservative systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiological evidence on psychotic experiences in children and adults: on the pathway from proneness to persistence to dimensional expression across mental disorders. Psychol Med. 2013. PMID 22850401 · DOI
- Zhao QF, Tan L, Wang HF, Jiang T, Tan MS, Tan L, et al.. The prevalence of neuropsychiatric symptoms in Alzheimer's disease: Systematic review and meta-analysis. J Affect Disord. 2016. PMID 26540080 · DOI
- Sterzer P, Adams RA, Fletcher P, Frith C, Lawrie SM, Muckli L, et al.. The Predictive Coding Account of Psychosis. Biol Psychiatry. 2018. PMID 30007575 · DOI · PMC6169400
- Bentall RP, Corcoran R, Howard R, Blackwood N, Kinderman P. Persecutory delusions: a review and theoretical integration. Clin Psychol Rev. 2001. PMID 11702511 · DOI
- Bentall RP, Kinderman P, Kaney S. The self, attributional processes and abnormal beliefs: towards a model of persecutory delusions. Behav Res Ther. 1994. PMID 8192633 · DOI
About this article
- Sources
- NLM Medical Subject Headings (definition, synonyms); NCBI PubMed (counts, identifiers); Europe PMC (open-access abstracts and citation counts).
- Verification
- Every reference was resolved against PubMed on 2026-11-04; title, year and DOI matched.
- Review state
- automated source verified; no human expert review has been recorded yet.
- Version
- 1, last updated 2026-11-04.
See how EvidenceLib is built. Spotted an error? Email support@evidencehelix.com.
Evidence strength
EvidenceHelix's computed view of the study designs behind this topic: how common meta-analyses, randomized trials and reviews are, how recent the literature is, and a plain-language reading. It describes the design mix of the literature. It is not a quality appraisal of any study, and it is not medical advice.