25
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Conversational agents in healthcare: a systematic review

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          Our 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.

          Methods

          We 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.

          Results

          The 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.

          Conclusions

          The 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 Registration

          The protocol for this systematic review is registered at PROSPERO with the number CRD42017065917.

          Related collections

          Most cited references28

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          The inevitable application of big data to health care.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide.

            Without a complete published description of interventions, clinicians and patients cannot reliably implement interventions that are shown to be useful, and other researchers cannot replicate or build on research findings. The quality of description of interventions in publications, however, is remarkably poor. To improve the completeness of reporting, and ultimately the replicability, of interventions, an international group of experts and stakeholders developed the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. The process involved a literature review for relevant checklists and research, a Delphi survey of an international panel of experts to guide item selection, and a face to face panel meeting. The resultant 12 item TIDieR checklist (brief name, why, what (materials), what (procedure), who provided, how, where, when and how much, tailoring, modifications, how well (planned), how well (actual)) is an extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement (item 5) and the SPIRIT 2013 statement (item 11). While the emphasis of the checklist is on trials, the guidance is intended to apply across all evaluative study designs. This paper presents the TIDieR checklist and guide, with an explanation and elaboration for each item, and examples of good reporting. The TIDieR checklist and guide should improve the reporting of interventions and make it easier for authors to structure accounts of their interventions, reviewers and editors to assess the descriptions, and readers to use the information.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              POMDP-Based Statistical Spoken Dialog Systems: A Review

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Am Med Inform Assoc
                J Am Med Inform Assoc
                jamia
                Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA
                Oxford University Press
                1067-5027
                1527-974X
                September 2018
                11 July 2018
                11 July 2018
                : 25
                : 9
                : 1248-1258
                Affiliations
                Centre for Health Informatics, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia
                Author notes
                Correspondence to Liliana Laranjo, Centre for Health Informatics, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Level 6, 75 Talavera Road, Sydney, 2113 NSW, Australia; liliana.laranjo@ 123456mq.edu.au

                Liliana Laranjo and Adam G Dunn contributed equally.

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1020-3402
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8462-0105
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6444-6584
                Article
                ocy072
                10.1093/jamia/ocy072
                6118869
                30010941
                4f0c0844-33fc-4eb1-860e-95879d369c0f
                © The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com

                History
                : 20 February 2018
                : 15 May 2018
                : 21 May 2018
                Page count
                Pages: 11
                Funding
                Funded by: National Health and Medical Research Council 10.13039/501100000925
                Award ID: APP1134919
                Funded by: Centre for Research Excellence in Digital Health
                Award ID: APP1054146
                Categories
                Reviews

                Bioinformatics & Computational biology
                artificial intelligence [mesh],medical informatics [mesh],conversational agent,dialogue system

                Comments

                Comment on this article