Conversational agents and the making of mental health recovery.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
Method: Taking conversational agents as our point of departure, we explore the ways official online materials explain and make sense of chatbots, their imagined functionality and value for (potential) users. We focus on three chatbots for mental health: Woebot, Wysa and Tess.
Findings: "Recovery" is largely missing as an overt focus across materials. However, analysis does reveal themes that speak to the struggles over practice, expertise and evidence that the concept of recovery articulates. We discuss these under the headings "troubled clinical responsibility", "extended virtue of (technological) self-care" and "altered ontologies and psychopathologies of time".
Conclusions: Ultimately, we argue that alongside more traditional forms of recovery, chatbots may be shaped by, and shaping, an increasingly individualised form of a "personal recovery imperative".
SUBMITTER: Meadows R
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7683843 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan-Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Conversational agents and the making of mental health recovery.
Meadows Robert R Hine Christine C Suddaby Eleanor E
Digital health 20200101
<h4>Background</h4>Artificial intelligence (AI) is said to be "transforming mental health". AI-based technologies and technique are now considered to have uses in almost every domain of mental health care: including decision-making, assessment and healthcare management. What remains underexplored is whether/how mental health <i>recovery</i> is situated within these discussions and practices.<h4>Method</h4>Taking conversational agents as our point of departure, we explore the ways official online ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:The use of conversational agent interventions (including chatbots and robots) in mental health is growing at a fast pace. Recent existing reviews have focused exclusively on a subset of embodied conversational agent interventions despite other modalities aiming to achieve the common goal of improved mental health. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to review the use of conversational agent interventions in the treatment of mental health problems. METHODS:We performed a systematic search using relevant databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Cochrane library). Studies that reported on an autonomous conversational agent that simulated conversation and reported on a mental health outcome were included. RESULTS:A total of 13 studies were included in the review. Among them, 4 full-scale randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. The rest were feasibility, pilot RCTs and quasi-experimental studies. Interventions were diverse in design and targeted a range of mental health problems using a wide variety of therapeutic orientations. All included studies reported reductions in psychological distress postintervention. Furthermore, 5 controlled studies demonstrated significant reductions in psychological distress compared with inactive control groups. In addition, 3 controlled studies comparing interventions with active control groups failed to demonstrate superior effects. Broader utility in promoting well-being in nonclinical populations was unclear. CONCLUSIONS:The efficacy and acceptability of conversational agent interventions for mental health problems are promising. However, a more robust experimental design is required to demonstrate efficacy and efficiency. A focus on streamlining interventions, demonstrating equivalence to other treatment modalities, and elucidating mechanisms of action has the potential to increase acceptance by users and clinicians and maximize reach.
| S-EPMC6914342 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Conversational artificial intelligence (AI), particularly AI-based conversational agents (CAs), is gaining traction in mental health care. Despite their growing usage, there is a scarcity of comprehensive evaluations of their impact on mental health and well-being. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to fill this gap by synthesizing evidence on the effectiveness of AI-based CAs in improving mental health and factors influencing their effectiveness and user experience. Twelve databases were searched for experimental studies of AI-based CAs' effects on mental illnesses and psychological well-being published before May 26, 2023. Out of 7834 records, 35 eligible studies were identified for systematic review, out of which 15 randomized controlled trials were included for meta-analysis. The meta-analysis revealed that AI-based CAs significantly reduce symptoms of depression (Hedge's g 0.64 [95% CI 0.17-1.12]) and distress (Hedge's g 0.7 [95% CI 0.18-1.22]). These effects were more pronounced in CAs that are multimodal, generative AI-based, integrated with mobile/instant messaging apps, and targeting clinical/subclinical and elderly populations. However, CA-based interventions showed no significant improvement in overall psychological well-being (Hedge's g 0.32 [95% CI -0.13 to 0.78]). User experience with AI-based CAs was largely shaped by the quality of human-AI therapeutic relationships, content engagement, and effective communication. These findings underscore the potential of AI-based CAs in addressing mental health issues. Future research should investigate the underlying mechanisms of their effectiveness, assess long-term effects across various mental health outcomes, and evaluate the safe integration of large language models (LLMs) in mental health care.
| S-EPMC10730549 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundChronic and mental health conditions are increasingly prevalent worldwide. As devices in our everyday lives offer more and more voice-based self-service, voice-based conversational agents (VCAs) have the potential to support the prevention and management of these conditions in a scalable manner. However, evidence on VCAs dedicated to the prevention and management of chronic and mental health conditions is unclear.ObjectiveThis study provides a better understanding of the current methods used in the evaluation of health interventions for the prevention and management of chronic and mental health conditions delivered through VCAs.MethodsWe conducted a systematic literature review using PubMed MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. We included primary research involving the prevention or management of chronic or mental health conditions through a VCA and reporting an empirical evaluation of the system either in terms of system accuracy, technology acceptance, or both. A total of 2 independent reviewers conducted the screening and data extraction, and agreement between them was measured using Cohen kappa. A narrative approach was used to synthesize the selected records.ResultsOf 7170 prescreened papers, 12 met the inclusion criteria. All studies were nonexperimental. The VCAs provided behavioral support (n=5), health monitoring services (n=3), or both (n=4). The interventions were delivered via smartphones (n=5), tablets (n=2), or smart speakers (n=3). In 2 cases, no device was specified. A total of 3 VCAs targeted cancer, whereas 2 VCAs targeted diabetes and heart failure. The other VCAs targeted hearing impairment, asthma, Parkinson disease, dementia, autism, intellectual disability, and depression. The majority of the studies (n=7) assessed technology acceptance, but only few studies (n=3) used validated instruments. Half of the studies (n=6) reported either performance measures on speech recognition or on the ability of VCAs to respond to health-related queries. Only a minority of the studies (n=2) reported behavioral measures or a measure of attitudes toward intervention-targeted health behavior. Moreover, only a minority of studies (n=4) reported controlling for participants' previous experience with technology. Finally, risk bias varied markedly.ConclusionsThe heterogeneity in the methods, the limited number of studies identified, and the high risk of bias show that research on VCAs for chronic and mental health conditions is still in its infancy. Although the results of system accuracy and technology acceptance are encouraging, there is still a need to establish more conclusive evidence on the efficacy of VCAs for the prevention and management of chronic and mental health conditions, both in absolute terms and in comparison with standard health care.
| S-EPMC8042539 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Conversational agents, also known as chatbots, are computer programs designed to simulate human text or verbal conversations. They are increasingly used in a range of fields, including health care. By enabling better accessibility, personalization, and efficiency, conversational agents have the potential to improve patient care. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to review the current applications, gaps, and challenges in the literature on conversational agents in health care and provide recommendations for their future research, design, and application. METHODS:We performed a scoping review. A broad literature search was performed in MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online; Ovid), EMBASE (Excerpta Medica database; Ovid), PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Central with the search terms "conversational agents," "conversational AI," "chatbots," and associated synonyms. We also searched the gray literature using sources such as the OCLC (Online Computer Library Center) WorldCat database and ResearchGate in April 2019. Reference lists of relevant articles were checked for further articles. Screening and data extraction were performed in parallel by 2 reviewers. The included evidence was analyzed narratively by employing the principles of thematic analysis. RESULTS:The literature search yielded 47 study reports (45 articles and 2 ongoing clinical trials) that matched the inclusion criteria. The identified conversational agents were largely delivered via smartphone apps (n=23) and used free text only as the main input (n=19) and output (n=30) modality. Case studies describing chatbot development (n=18) were the most prevalent, and only 11 randomized controlled trials were identified. The 3 most commonly reported conversational agent applications in the literature were treatment and monitoring, health care service support, and patient education. CONCLUSIONS:The literature on conversational agents in health care is largely descriptive and aimed at treatment and monitoring and health service support. It mostly reports on text-based, artificial intelligence-driven, and smartphone app-delivered conversational agents. There is an urgent need for a robust evaluation of diverse health care conversational agents' formats, focusing on their acceptability, safety, and effectiveness.
| S-EPMC7442948 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:The personalization of conversational agents with natural language user interfaces is seeing increasing use in health care applications, shaping the content, structure, or purpose of the dialogue between humans and conversational agents. OBJECTIVE:The goal of this systematic review was to understand the ways in which personalization has been used with conversational agents in health care and characterize the methods of its implementation. METHODS:We searched on PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycInfo, and ACM Digital Library using a predefined search strategy. The studies were included if they: (1) were primary research studies that focused on consumers, caregivers, or health care professionals; (2) involved a conversational agent with an unconstrained natural language interface; (3) tested the system with human subjects; and (4) implemented personalization features. RESULTS:The search found 1958 publications. After abstract and full-text screening, 13 studies were included in the review. Common examples of personalized content included feedback, daily health reports, alerts, warnings, and recommendations. The personalization features were implemented without a theoretical framework of customization and with limited evaluation of its impact. While conversational agents with personalization features were reported to improve user satisfaction, user engagement and dialogue quality, the role of personalization in improving health outcomes was not assessed directly. CONCLUSIONS:Most of the studies in our review implemented the personalization features without theoretical or evidence-based support for them and did not leverage the recent developments in other domains of personalization. Future research could incorporate personalization as a distinct design factor with a more careful consideration of its impact on health outcomes and its implications on patient safety, privacy, and decision-making.
| S-EPMC6873147 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMental disorders cause substantial health-related burden worldwide. Mobile health interventions are increasingly being used to promote mental health and well-being, as they could improve access to treatment and reduce associated costs. Behavior change is an important feature of interventions aimed at improving mental health and well-being. There is a need to discern the active components that can promote behavior change in such interventions and ultimately improve users' mental health.ObjectiveThis study systematically identified mental health conversational agents (CAs) currently available in app stores and assessed the behavior change techniques (BCTs) used. We further described their main features, technical aspects, and quality in terms of engagement, functionality, esthetics, and information using the Mobile Application Rating Scale.MethodsThe search, selection, and assessment of apps were adapted from a systematic review methodology and included a search, 2 rounds of selection, and an evaluation following predefined criteria. We conducted a systematic app search of Apple's App Store and Google Play using 42matters. Apps with CAs in English that uploaded or updated from January 2020 and provided interventions aimed at improving mental health and well-being and the assessment or management of mental disorders were tested by at least 2 reviewers. The BCT taxonomy v1, a comprehensive list of 93 BCTs, was used to identify the specific behavior change components in CAs.ResultsWe found 18 app-based mental health CAs. Most CAs had <1000 user ratings on both app stores (12/18, 67%) and targeted several conditions such as stress, anxiety, and depression (13/18, 72%). All CAs addressed >1 mental disorder. Most CAs (14/18, 78%) used cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). Half (9/18, 50%) of the CAs identified were rule based (ie, only offered predetermined answers) and the other half (9/18, 50%) were artificial intelligence enhanced (ie, included open-ended questions). CAs used 48 different BCTs and included on average 15 (SD 8.77; range 4-30) BCTs. The most common BCTs were 3.3 "Social support (emotional)," 4.1 "Instructions for how to perform a behavior," 11.2 "Reduce negative emotions," and 6.1 "Demonstration of the behavior." One-third (5/14, 36%) of the CAs claiming to be CBT based did not include core CBT concepts.ConclusionsMental health CAs mostly targeted various mental health issues such as stress, anxiety, and depression, reflecting a broad intervention focus. The most common BCTs identified serve to promote the self-management of mental disorders with few therapeutic elements. CA developers should consider the quality of information, user confidentiality, access, and emergency management when designing mental health CAs. Future research should assess the role of artificial intelligence in promoting behavior change within CAs and determine the choice of BCTs in evidence-based psychotherapies to enable systematic, consistent, and transparent development and evaluation of effective digital mental health interventions.
| S-EPMC10394504 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe high demand for health care services and the growing capability of artificial intelligence have led to the development of conversational agents designed to support a variety of health-related activities, including behavior change, treatment support, health monitoring, training, triage, and screening support. Automation of these tasks could free clinicians to focus on more complex work and increase the accessibility to health care services for the public. An overarching assessment of the acceptability, usability, and effectiveness of these agents in health care is needed to collate the evidence so that future development can target areas for improvement and potential for sustainable adoption.ObjectiveThis systematic review aims to assess the effectiveness and usability of conversational agents in health care and identify the elements that users like and dislike to inform future research and development of these agents.MethodsPubMed, Medline (Ovid), EMBASE (Excerpta Medica dataBASE), CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Web of Science, and the Association for Computing Machinery Digital Library were systematically searched for articles published since 2008 that evaluated unconstrained natural language processing conversational agents used in health care. EndNote (version X9, Clarivate Analytics) reference management software was used for initial screening, and full-text screening was conducted by 1 reviewer. Data were extracted, and the risk of bias was assessed by one reviewer and validated by another.ResultsA total of 31 studies were selected and included a variety of conversational agents, including 14 chatbots (2 of which were voice chatbots), 6 embodied conversational agents (3 of which were interactive voice response calls, virtual patients, and speech recognition screening systems), 1 contextual question-answering agent, and 1 voice recognition triage system. Overall, the evidence reported was mostly positive or mixed. Usability and satisfaction performed well (27/30 and 26/31), and positive or mixed effectiveness was found in three-quarters of the studies (23/30). However, there were several limitations of the agents highlighted in specific qualitative feedback.ConclusionsThe studies generally reported positive or mixed evidence for the effectiveness, usability, and satisfactoriness of the conversational agents investigated, but qualitative user perceptions were more mixed. The quality of many of the studies was limited, and improved study design and reporting are necessary to more accurately evaluate the usefulness of the agents in health care and identify key areas for improvement. Further research should also analyze the cost-effectiveness, privacy, and security of the agents.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.2196/16934.
| S-EPMC7644372 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Recent advancements in speech recognition technology in combination with increased access to smart speaker devices are expanding conversational interactions to ever-new areas of our lives - including our health and wellbeing. Prior human-computer interaction research suggests that Conversational Agents (CAs) have the potential to support a variety of health-related outcomes, due in part to their intuitive and engaging nature. Realizing this potential requires however developing a rich understanding of users' needs and experiences in relation to these still-emerging technologies. To inform the design of CAs for health and wellbeing, we analyze 2741 critical reviews of 485 Alexa health and fitness Skills using an automated topic modeling approach; identifying 15 subjects of criticism across four key areas of design (functionality, reliability, usability, pleasurability). Based on these findings, we discuss implications for the design of engaging CAs to support health and wellbeing.
| S-EPMC9021431 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveOur objective was to review the characteristics, current applications, and evaluation measures of conversational agents with unconstrained natural language input capabilities used for health-related purposes.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycInfo, and ACM Digital using a predefined search strategy. Studies were included if they focused on consumers or healthcare professionals; involved a conversational agent using any unconstrained natural language input; and reported evaluation measures resulting from user interaction with the system. Studies were screened by independent reviewers and Cohen's kappa measured inter-coder agreement.ResultsThe database search retrieved 1513 citations; 17 articles (14 different conversational agents) met the inclusion criteria. Dialogue management strategies were mostly finite-state and frame-based (6 and 7 conversational agents, respectively); agent-based strategies were present in one type of system. Two studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 1 was cross-sectional, and the remaining were quasi-experimental. Half of the conversational agents supported consumers with health tasks such as self-care. The only RCT evaluating the efficacy of a conversational agent found a significant effect in reducing depression symptoms (effect size d = 0.44, p = .04). Patient safety was rarely evaluated in the included studies.ConclusionsThe use of conversational agents with unconstrained natural language input capabilities for health-related purposes is an emerging field of research, where the few published studies were mainly quasi-experimental, and rarely evaluated efficacy or safety. Future studies would benefit from more robust experimental designs and standardized reporting.Protocol registrationThe protocol for this systematic review is registered at PROSPERO with the number CRD42017065917.
| S-EPMC6118869 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Conversational agents (CAs) are systems that mimic human conversations using text or spoken language. Their widely used examples include voice-activated systems such as Apple Siri, Google Assistant, Amazon Alexa, and Microsoft Cortana. The use of CAs in health care has been on the rise, but concerns about their potential safety risks often remain understudied. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to analyze how commonly available, general-purpose CAs on smartphones and smart speakers respond to health and lifestyle prompts (questions and open-ended statements) by examining their responses in terms of content and structure alike. METHODS:We followed a piloted script to present health- and lifestyle-related prompts to 8 CAs. The CAs' responses were assessed for their appropriateness on the basis of the prompt type: responses to safety-critical prompts were deemed appropriate if they included a referral to a health professional or service, whereas responses to lifestyle prompts were deemed appropriate if they provided relevant information to address the problem prompted. The response structure was also examined according to information sources (Web search-based or precoded), response content style (informative and/or directive), confirmation of prompt recognition, and empathy. RESULTS:The 8 studied CAs provided in total 240 responses to 30 prompts. They collectively responded appropriately to 41% (46/112) of the safety-critical and 39% (37/96) of the lifestyle prompts. The ratio of appropriate responses deteriorated when safety-critical prompts were rephrased or when the agent used a voice-only interface. The appropriate responses included mostly directive content and empathy statements for the safety-critical prompts and a mix of informative and directive content for the lifestyle prompts. CONCLUSIONS:Our results suggest that the commonly available, general-purpose CAs on smartphones and smart speakers with unconstrained natural language interfaces are limited in their ability to advise on both the safety-critical health prompts and lifestyle prompts. Our study also identified some response structures the CAs employed to present their appropriate responses. Further investigation is needed to establish guidelines for designing suitable response structures for different prompt types.
| S-EPMC7055771 | biostudies-literature