Dataset Information

Improving User Experience of Virtual Health Assistants: Scoping Review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Virtual assistants can be used to deliver innovative health programs that provide appealing, personalized, and convenient health advice and support at scale and low cost. Design characteristics that influence the look and feel of the virtual assistant, such as visual appearance or language features, may significantly influence users' experience and engagement with the assistant.

Objective

This scoping review aims to provide an overview of the experimental research examining how design characteristics of virtual health assistants affect user experience, summarize research findings of experimental research examining how design characteristics of virtual health assistants affect user experience, and provide recommendations for the design of virtual health assistants if sufficient evidence exists.

Methods

We searched 5 electronic databases (Web of Science, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and ACM Digital Library) to identify the studies that used an experimental design to compare the effects of design characteristics between 2 or more versions of an interactive virtual health assistant on user experience among adults. Data were synthesized descriptively. Health domains, design characteristics, and outcomes were categorized, and descriptive statistics were used to summarize the body of research. Results for each study were categorized as positive, negative, or no effect, and a matrix of the design characteristics and outcome categories was constructed to summarize the findings.

Results

The database searches identified 6879 articles after the removal of duplicates. We included 48 articles representing 45 unique studies in the review. The most common health domains were mental health and physical activity. Studies most commonly examined design characteristics in the categories of visual design or conversational style and relational behavior and assessed outcomes in the categories of personality, satisfaction, relationship, or use intention. Over half of the design characteristics were examined by only 1 study. Results suggest that empathy and relational behavior and self-disclosure are related to more positive user experience. Results also suggest that if a human-like avatar is used, realistic rendering and medical attire may potentially be related to more positive user experience; however, more research is needed to confirm this.

Conclusions

There is a growing body of scientific evidence examining the impact of virtual health assistants' design characteristics on user experience. Taken together, data suggest that the look and feel of a virtual health assistant does affect user experience. Virtual health assistants that show empathy, display nonverbal relational behaviors, and disclose personal information about themselves achieve better user experience. At present, the evidence base is broad, and the studies are typically small in scale and highly heterogeneous. Further research, particularly using longitudinal research designs with repeated user interactions, is needed to inform the optimal design of virtual health assistants.

SUBMITTER: Curtis RG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8734926 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has had global impacts and caused some health systems to experience substantial pressure. The need for accurate health information has been felt widely. Chatbots have great potential to reach people with authoritative information, and a number of chatbots have been quickly developed to disseminate information about COVID-19. However, little is known about user experiences of and perspectives on these tools.ObjectiveThis study aimed to describe what is known about the user experience and user uptake of COVID-19 chatbots.MethodsA scoping review was carried out in June 2021 using keywords to cover the literature concerning chatbots, user engagement, and COVID-19. The search strategy included databases covering health, communication, marketing, and the COVID-19 pandemic specifically, including MEDLINE Ovid, Embase, CINAHL, ACM Digital Library, Emerald, and EBSCO. Studies that assessed the design, marketing, and user features of COVID-19 chatbots or those that explored user perspectives and experience were included. We excluded papers that were not related to COVID-19; did not include any reporting on user perspectives, experience, or the general use of chatbot features or marketing; or where a version was not available in English. The authors independently screened results for inclusion, using both backward and forward citation checking of the included papers. A thematic analysis was carried out with the included papers.ResultsA total of 517 papers were sourced from the literature, and 10 were included in the final review. Our scoping review identified a number of factors impacting adoption and engagement including content, trust, digital ability, and acceptability. The papers included discussions about chatbots developed for COVID-19 screening and general COVID-19 information, as well as studies investigating user perceptions and opinions on COVID-19 chatbots.ConclusionsThe COVID-19 pandemic presented a unique and specific challenge for digital health interventions. Design and implementation were required at a rapid speed as digital health service adoption accelerated globally. Chatbots for COVID-19 have been developed quickly as the pandemic has challenged health systems. There is a need for more comprehensive and routine reporting of factors impacting adoption and engagement. This paper has shown both the potential of chatbots to reach users in an emergency and the need to better understand how users engage and what they want.

Project description:BackgroundThe integration of smart technologies, including wearables and voice-activated devices, is increasingly recognized for enhancing the independence and well-being of older adults. However, the long-term dynamics of their use and the coadaptation process with older adults remain poorly understood. This scoping review explores how interactions between older adults and smart technologies evolve over time to improve both user experience and technology utility.ObjectiveThis review synthesizes existing research on the coadaptation between older adults and smart technologies, focusing on longitudinal changes in use patterns, the effectiveness of technological adaptations, and the implications for future technology development and deployment to improve user experiences.MethodsFollowing the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewer's Manual and PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines, this scoping review examined peer-reviewed papers from databases including Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, PEDro, Ovid PsycINFO, and EBSCO CINAHL from the year 2000 to August 28, 2023, and included forward and backward searches. The search was updated on March 1, 2024. Empirical studies were included if they involved (1) individuals aged 55 years or older living independently and (2) focused on interactions and adaptations between older adults and wearables and voice-activated virtual assistants in interventions for a minimum period of 8 weeks. Data extraction was informed by the selection and optimization with compensation framework and the sex- and gender-based analysis plus theoretical framework and used a directed content analysis approach.ResultsThe search yielded 16,143 papers. Following title and abstract screening and a full-text review, 5 papers met the inclusion criteria. Study populations were mostly female participants and aged 73-83 years from the United States and engaged with voice-activated virtual assistants accessed through smart speakers and wearables. Users frequently used simple commands related to music and weather, integrating devices into daily routines. However, communication barriers often led to frustration due to devices' inability to recognize cues or provide personalized responses. The findings suggest that while older adults can integrate smart technologies into their lives, a lack of customization and user-friendly interfaces hinder long-term adoption and satisfaction. The studies highlight the need for technology to be further developed so they can better meet this demographic's evolving needs and call for research addressing small sample sizes and limited diversity.ConclusionsOur findings highlight a critical need for continued research into the dynamic and reciprocal relationship between smart technologies and older adults over time. Future studies should focus on more diverse populations and extend monitoring periods to provide deeper insights into the coadaptation process. Insights gained from this review are vital for informing the development of more intuitive, user-centric smart technology solutions to better support the aging population in maintaining independence and enhancing their quality of life.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.2196/51129.

Project description:ObjectivesPoor electronic health record (EHR) usability is associated with patient safety concerns, user dissatisfaction, and provider burnout. EHR certification requires vendors to perform user testing. However, there are no such requirements for site-specific implementations. Health care organizations customize EHR implementations, potentially introducing usability problems. Site-specific usability evaluations may help to identify these concerns, and "discount" usability methods afford health systems a means of doing so even without dedicated usability specialists. This report characterizes a site-specific discount user testing program launched at an academic medical center. We describe lessons learned and highlight three of the EHR features in detail to demonstrate the impact of testing on implementation decisions and on users.MethodsThirteen new EHR features which had already undergone heuristic evaluation and iterative design were evaluated over the course of three user test events. Each event included five to six users. Participants used think aloud technique. Measures of user efficiency, effectiveness, and satisfaction were collected. Usability concerns were characterized by the type of usability heuristic violated and by correctability.ResultsUsability concerns occurred at a rate of 2.5 per feature tested. Seventy percent of the usability concerns were deemed correctable prior to implementation. The first highlighted feature was moved to production despite low single ease question (SEQ) scores which may have predicted its subsequent withdrawal from production based on post implementation feedback. Another feature was rebuilt based on usability findings, and a new version was retested and moved to production. A third feature highlights an easily correctable usability concern identified in user testing. Quantitative usability metrics generally reinforced qualitative findings.ConclusionSimplified user testing with a limited number of participants identifies correctable usability concerns, even after heuristic evaluation. Our discount usability approach to site-specific usability has a role in implementations and may improve the usability of the EHR for the end user.

Project description:BackgroundSocial anxiety disorder (SAD) is a debilitating psychiatric disorder that affects occupational and social functioning. Virtual reality (VR) therapies can provide effective treatment for people with SAD. However, with rapid innovations in immersive VR technology, more contemporary research is required to examine the effectiveness and concomitant user experience outcomes (ie, safety, usability, acceptability, and attrition) of emerging VR interventions for SAD.ObjectiveThe aim of this systematic review was to examine the effectiveness and user experience of contemporary VR interventions among people with SAD.MethodsThe Cochrane Library, Emcare, PsycINFO, PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched between January 1, 2012, and April 26, 2022. Deduplicated search results were screened based on title and abstract information. Full-text examination was conducted on 71 articles. Studies of all designs and comparator groups were included if they appraised the effectiveness and user experience outcomes of any immersive VR intervention among people with SAD. A standardized coding sheet was used to extract data on key participant, intervention, comparator, outcome, and study design items.ResultsThe findings were tabulated and discussed using a narrative synthesis. A total of 18 studies met the inclusion criteria.ConclusionsThe findings showed that VR exposure therapy-based interventions can generally provide effective, safe, usable, and acceptable treatments for adults with SAD. The average attrition rate from VR treatment was low (11.36%) despite some reported user experience difficulties, including potential simulator sickness, exposure-based emotional distress, and problems with managing treatment delivered in a synchronous group setting. This review also revealed several research gaps, including a lack of VR treatment studies on children and adolescents with SAD as well as a paucity of standardized assessments of VR user experience interactions. More studies are required to address these issues.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42022353891; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=353891.

Project description:BackgroundAcross eHealth intervention studies involving children, adolescents, and their parents, researchers have measured user experience to assist with intervention development, refinement, and evaluation. To date, no widely accepted definitions or measures of user experience exist to support a standardized approach for evaluation and comparison within or across interventions.ObjectiveWe conduct a scoping review with subsequent Delphi consultation to identify how user experience is defined and measured in eHealth research studies, characterize the measurement tools used, and establish working definitions for domains of user experience that could be used in future eHealth evaluations.MethodsWe systematically searched electronic databases for published and gray literature available from January 1, 2005, to April 11, 2019. We included studies assessing an eHealth intervention that targeted any health condition and was designed for use by children, adolescents, and their parents. eHealth interventions needed to be web-, computer-, or mobile-based, mediated by the internet with some degree of interactivity. We required studies to report the measurement of user experience as first-person experiences, involving cognitive and behavioral factors reported by intervention users. We appraised the quality of user experience measures in included studies using published criteria: well-established, approaching well-established, promising, or not yet established. We conducted a descriptive analysis of how user experience was defined and measured in each study. Review findings subsequently informed the survey questions used in the Delphi consultations with eHealth researchers and adolescent users for how user experience should be defined and measured.ResultsOf the 8634 articles screened for eligibility, 129 articles and 1 erratum were included in the review. A total of 30 eHealth researchers and 27 adolescents participated in the Delphi consultations. On the basis of the literature and consultations, we proposed working definitions for 6 main user experience domains: acceptability, satisfaction, credibility, usability, user-reported adherence, and perceived impact. Although most studies incorporated a study-specific measure, we identified 10 well-established measures to quantify 5 of the 6 domains of user experience (all except for self-reported adherence). Our adolescent and researcher participants ranked perceived impact as one of the most important domains of user experience and usability as one of the least important domains. Rankings between adolescents and researchers diverged for other domains.ConclusionsFindings highlight the various ways in which user experience has been defined and measured across studies and what aspects are most valued by researchers and adolescent users. We propose incorporating the working definitions and available measures of user experience to support consistent evaluation and reporting of outcomes across studies. Future studies can refine the definitions and measurement of user experience, explore how user experience relates to other eHealth outcomes, and inform the design and use of human-centered eHealth interventions.

Project description:BackgroundWhile many digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) have been found to be efficacious, patient engagement with DMHIs has increasingly emerged as a concern for implementation in real-world clinical settings. To address engagement, we must first understand what standard engagement levels are in the context of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and how these compare with other treatments.ObjectiveThis scoping review aims to examine the state of reporting on intervention engagement in RCTs of mobile app-based interventions intended to treat symptoms of depression. We sought to identify what engagement metrics are and are not routinely reported as well as what the metrics that are reported reflect about standard engagement levels.MethodsWe conducted a systematic search of 7 databases to identify studies meeting our eligibility criteria, namely, RCTs that evaluated use of a mobile app-based intervention in adults, for which depressive symptoms were a primary outcome of interest. We then extracted 2 kinds of information from each article: intervention details and indices of DMHI engagement. A 5-element framework of minimum necessary DMHI engagement reporting was derived by our team and guided our data extraction. This framework included (1) recommended app use as communicated to participants at enrollment and, when reported, app adherence criteria; (2) rate of intervention uptake among those assigned to the intervention; (3) level of app use metrics reported, specifically number of uses and time spent using the app; (4) duration of app use metrics (ie, weekly use patterns); and (5) number of intervention completers.ResultsDatabase searching yielded 2083 unique records. Of these, 22 studies were eligible for inclusion. Only 64% (14/22) of studies included in this review specified rate of intervention uptake. Level of use metrics was only reported in 59% (13/22) of the studies reviewed. Approximately one-quarter of the studies (5/22, 23%) reported duration of use metrics. Only half (11/22, 50%) of the studies reported the number of participants who completed the app-based components of the intervention as intended or other metrics related to completion. Findings in those studies reporting metrics related to intervention completion indicated that between 14.4% and 93.0% of participants randomized to a DMHI condition completed the intervention as intended or according to a specified adherence criteria.ConclusionsFindings suggest that engagement was underreported and widely varied. It was not uncommon to see completion rates at or below 50% (11/22) of those participants randomized to a treatment condition or to simply see completion rates not reported at all. This variability in reporting suggests a failure to establish sufficient reporting standards and limits the conclusions that can be drawn about level of engagement with DMHIs. Based on these findings, the 5-element framework applied in this review may be useful as a minimum necessary standard for DMHI engagement reporting.

Project description:ObjectivesThe administration of nursing assistants (NAs) is closely associated with patient outcomes, but studies evaluating intrahospital administration of NAs are limited. This study aimed to identify existing literature on intrahospital NAs' administration approaches.DesignScoping review.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, ProQuest, CNKI, APA PsycInfo, Wanfang Med, SinoMed, Ovid Emcare, NICE, AHRQ, CADTH, JBI EBP and Cochrane DSR were searched for articles published between January 2011 and March 2022.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesQualitative, quantitative or mixed-method studies and evidence syntheses that evaluate administration approaches, models and appraisal tools of intrahospital NAs were included.Data extraction and synthesisTwo independent reviewers conducted search, data selection and data extraction according to Joanna Briggs Institute guidance and methodology for scoping review. The quality of included studies was assessed using Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool or AMSTAR V.2. Data were synthesised using narrative methods and frequency effect size analysis.ResultsThirty-six studies were eligible, with acceptable quality. We identified 1 administration model, 9 administration methods, 15 educational programmes and 7 appraisal tools from the included studies. The frequency effect size analysis yielded 15 topics of the main focus at four levels, suggesting that included articles were mainly (33%) focused on the competency of NAs, and the lectures were the most (80%) used strategy in quality improvement projects. Evidence from the studies was of low-to-moderate quality, indicating huge gaps between evidence-based research and management practice.ConclusionsPractical intrahospital administration approaches were revealed, and fifteen primarily focused topics were identified. We should explore this area more thoroughly using structured frameworks and standardised methodology. This scoping review will help managers find more effective ways to improve the quality of care. Researchers may focus more on evidence-based practice in NA administration using the 15 topics as a breakthrough.