Search

BackgroundConversational agents (CAs) for chronic disease management are receiving increasing attention in academia and the industry. However, long-term adherence to CAs is still a challenge and needs to be explored. Personalization of CAs has the potential to improve long-term adherence and, with it, user satisfaction, task efficiency, perceived benefits, and intended behavior change. Research on personalized CAs has already addressed different aspects, such as personalized recommendations and anthropomorphic cues. However, detailed information on interaction styles between patients and CAs in the role of medical health care professionals is scant. Such interaction styles play essential roles for patient satisfaction, treatment adherence, and outcome, as has been shown for physician-patient interactions. Currently, it is not clear (1) whether chronically ill patients prefer a CA with a paternalistic, informative, interpretive, or deliberative interaction style, and (2) which factors influence these preferences. ObjectiveWe aimed to investigate the preferences of chronically ill patients for CA-delivered interaction styles. MethodsWe conducted two studies. The first study included a paper-based approach and explored the preferences of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients for paternalistic, informative, interpretive, and deliberative CA-delivered interaction styles. Based on these results, a second study assessed the effects of the paternalistic and deliberative interaction styles on the relationship quality between the CA and patients via hierarchical multiple linear regression analyses in an online experiment with COPD patients. Patients’ sociodemographic and disease-specific characteristics served as moderator variables. ResultsStudy 1 with 117 COPD patients revealed a preference for the deliberative (50/117) and informative (34/117) interaction styles across demographic characteristics. All patients who preferred the paternalistic style over the other interaction styles had more severe COPD (three patients, Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease class 3 or 4). In Study 2 with 123 newly recruited COPD patients, younger participants and participants with a less recent COPD diagnosis scored higher on interaction-related outcomes when interacting with a CA that delivered the deliberative interaction style (interaction between age and CA type: relationship quality: b=−0.77, 95% CI −1.37 to −0.18; intention to continue interaction: b=−0.49, 95% CI −0.97 to −0.01; working alliance attachment bond: b=−0.65, 95% CI −1.26 to −0.04; working alliance goal agreement: b=−0.59, 95% CI −1.18 to −0.01; interaction between recency of COPD diagnosis and CA type: working alliance goal agreement: b=0.57, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.13). ConclusionsOur results indicate that age and a patient’s personal disease experience inform which CA interaction style the patient should be paired with to achieve increased interaction-related outcomes with the CA. These results allow the design of personalized health care CAs with the goal to increase long-term adherence to health-promoting behavior.

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.

BackgroundSuccessful management of chronic diseases requires a trustful collaboration between health care professionals, patients, and family members. Scalable conversational agents, designed to assist health care professionals, may play a significant role in supporting this collaboration in a scalable way by reaching out to the everyday lives of patients and their family members. However, to date, it remains unclear whether conversational agents, in such a role, would be accepted and whether they can support this multistakeholder collaboration. ObjectiveWith asthma in children representing a relevant target of chronic disease management, this study had the following objectives: (1) to describe the design of MAX, a conversational agent–delivered asthma intervention that supports health care professionals targeting child-parent teams in their everyday lives; and (2) to assess the (a) reach of MAX, (b) conversational agent–patient working alliance, (c) acceptance of MAX, (d) intervention completion rate, (e) cognitive and behavioral outcomes, and (f) human effort and responsiveness of health care professionals in primary and secondary care settings. MethodsMAX was designed to increase cognitive skills (ie, knowledge about asthma) and behavioral skills (ie, inhalation technique) in 10-15-year-olds with asthma, and enables support by a health professional and a family member. To this end, three design goals guided the development: (1) to build a conversational agent–patient working alliance; (2) to offer hybrid (human- and conversational agent–supported) ubiquitous coaching; and (3) to provide an intervention with high experiential value. An interdisciplinary team of computer scientists, asthma experts, and young patients with their parents developed the intervention collaboratively. The conversational agent communicates with health care professionals via email, with patients via a mobile chat app, and with a family member via SMS text messaging. A single-arm feasibility study in primary and secondary care settings was performed to assess MAX. ResultsResults indicated an overall positive evaluation of MAX with respect to its reach (49.5%, 49/99 of recruited and eligible patient-family member teams participated), a strong patient-conversational agent working alliance, and high acceptance by all relevant stakeholders. Moreover, MAX led to improved cognitive and behavioral skills and an intervention completion rate of 75.5%. Family members supported the patients in 269 out of 275 (97.8%) coaching sessions. Most of the conversational turns (99.5%) were conducted between patients and the conversational agent as opposed to between patients and health care professionals, thus indicating the scalability of MAX. In addition, it took health care professionals less than 4 minutes to assess the inhalation technique and 3 days to deliver related feedback to the patients. Several suggestions for improvement were made. ConclusionsThis study provides the first evidence that conversational agents, designed as mediating social actors involving health care professionals, patients, and family members, are not only accepted in such a “team player” role but also show potential to improve health-relevant outcomes in chronic disease management.

BackgroundRecent years have witnessed a constant increase in the number of people with chronic conditions requiring ongoing medical support in their everyday lives. However, global health systems are not adequately equipped for this extraordinarily time-consuming and cost-intensive development. Here, conversational agents (CAs) can offer easily scalable and ubiquitous support. Moreover, different aspects of CAs have not yet been sufficiently investigated to fully exploit their potential. One such trait is the interaction style between patients and CAs. In human-to-human settings, the interaction style is an imperative part of the interaction between patients and physicians. Patient-physician interaction is recognized as a critical success factor for patient satisfaction, treatment adherence, and subsequent treatment outcomes. However, so far, it remains effectively unknown how different interaction styles can be implemented into CA interactions and whether these styles are recognizable by users. ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to develop an approach to reproducibly induce 2 specific interaction styles into CA-patient dialogs and subsequently test and validate them in a chronic health care context. MethodsOn the basis of the Roter Interaction Analysis System and iterative evaluations by scientific experts and medical health care professionals, we identified 10 communication components that characterize the 2 developed interaction styles: deliberative and paternalistic interaction styles. These communication components were used to develop 2 CA variations, each representing one of the 2 interaction styles. We assessed them in a web-based between-subject experiment. The participants were asked to put themselves in the position of a patient with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. These participants were randomly assigned to interact with one of the 2 CAs and subsequently asked to identify the respective interaction style. Chi-square test was used to assess the correct identification of the CA-patient interaction style. ResultsA total of 88 individuals (42/88, 48% female; mean age 31.5 years, SD 10.1 years) fulfilled the inclusion criteria and participated in the web-based experiment. The participants in both the paternalistic and deliberative conditions correctly identified the underlying interaction styles of the CAs in more than 80% of the assessments (X21,88=38.2; P

BackgroundA rising number of conversational agents or chatbots are equipped with artificial intelligence (AI) architecture. They are increasingly prevalent in health care applications such as those providing education and support to patients with chronic diseases, one of the leading causes of death in the 21st century. AI-based chatbots enable more effective and frequent interactions with such patients. ObjectiveThe goal of this systematic literature review is to review the characteristics, health care conditions, and AI architectures of AI-based conversational agents designed specifically for chronic diseases. MethodsWe conducted a systematic literature review using PubMed MEDLINE, EMBASE, PyscInfo, CINAHL, ACM Digital Library, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science. We applied a predefined search strategy using the terms “conversational agent,” “healthcare,” “artificial intelligence,” and their synonyms. We updated the search results using Google alerts, and screened reference lists for other relevant articles. We included primary research studies that involved the prevention, treatment, or rehabilitation of chronic diseases, involved a conversational agent, and included any kind of AI architecture. Two independent reviewers conducted screening and data extraction, and Cohen kappa was used to measure interrater agreement.A narrative approach was applied for data synthesis. ResultsThe literature search found 2052 articles, out of which 10 papers met the inclusion criteria. The small number of identified studies together with the prevalence of quasi-experimental studies (n=7) and prevailing prototype nature of the chatbots (n=7) revealed the immaturity of the field. The reported chatbots addressed a broad variety of chronic diseases (n=6), showcasing a tendency to develop specialized conversational agents for individual chronic conditions. However, there lacks comparison of these chatbots within and between chronic diseases. In addition, the reported evaluation measures were not standardized, and the addressed health goals showed a large range. Together, these study characteristics complicated comparability and open room for future research. While natural language processing represented the most used AI technique (n=7) and the majority of conversational agents allowed for multimodal interaction (n=6), the identified studies demonstrated broad heterogeneity, lack of depth of reported AI techniques and systems, and inconsistent usage of taxonomy of the underlying AI software, further aggravating comparability and generalizability of study results. ConclusionsThe literature on AI-based conversational agents for chronic conditions is scarce and mostly consists of quasi-experimental studies with chatbots in prototype stage that use natural language processing and allow for multimodal user interaction. Future research could profit from evidence-based evaluation of the AI-based conversational agents and comparison thereof within and between different chronic health conditions. Besides increased comparability, the quality of chatbots developed for specific chronic conditions and their subsequent impact on the target patients could be enhanced by more structured development and standardized evaluation processes.

Introduction: Aging is the strongest risk factor for most chronic diseases. The rising burden of an aging population and non-communicable diseases (NCDs), contributes to escalating costs for society. Several non-pharmaceutical interventions can lower the risk of NCDs, including common mental disorders (CMDs), and may slow down biological aging, as evidenced by outcome markers such as epigenetic clocks. However, a comprehensive overview of whether and which non-pharmaceutical interventions may impact human epigenetic aging is missing. Synthesizing evidence of interventions on epigenetic aging that can be adopted by a wider population is key to guide healthy aging initiatives and to reduce the burden of NCDs and CMDs. This scoping review will identify and assess non-pharmaceutical interventions aimed to slow down epigenetic aging, including their intervention components, and the mode used for intervention delivery. Methods and analysis: This protocol will include single- and multicomponent intervention studies that target individuals ≥ 18 years of age and use epigenetic clocks as primary or secondary outcomes. Five electronic databases will be searched for studies between July 2011 until December 2023. The final search will include the search terms adults, non-pharmaceutical interventions, epigenetic aging and their respective synonyms. We will include randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled studies, cohort studies, and case-control studies. Additionally, the reference list of other reviews will be screened for relevant articles. Study selection is carried out based on the defined eligibility criteria by two authors. Quality and risk of bias for the included studies will be assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist. Data extraction will include generic key information such as the research question and results, the intervention components, and specific epigenetic outcome measures used. Further data regarding the delivery mode of the treatment protocol will be collected. Ethics and dissemination: This scoping review will summarize the characteristics of non-pharmaceutical intervention studies on epigenetic aging. This review will be the first step to formally identify key intervention components and delivery modes to guide future research on healthy aging interventions. The results will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication and presented at relevant conferences. This review will synthesize information from available publications and does not require further ethical approval. Registration details: Open Science Framework https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/FEHNB. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]