Transforming Health Care Through Chatbots for Medical History-Taking and Future Directions: Comprehensive Systematic Review.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICAL INFORMATICS
Michael Hindelang, Sebastian Sitaru, Alexander Zink
{"title":"Transforming Health Care Through Chatbots for Medical History-Taking and Future Directions: Comprehensive Systematic Review.","authors":"Michael Hindelang, Sebastian Sitaru, Alexander Zink","doi":"10.2196/56628","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The integration of artificial intelligence and chatbot technology in health care has attracted significant attention due to its potential to improve patient care and streamline history-taking. As artificial intelligence-driven conversational agents, chatbots offer the opportunity to revolutionize history-taking, necessitating a comprehensive examination of their impact on medical practice.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This systematic review aims to assess the role, effectiveness, usability, and patient acceptance of chatbots in medical history-taking. It also examines potential challenges and future opportunities for integration into clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search included PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE (via Ovid), CENTRAL, Scopus, and Open Science and covered studies through July 2024. The inclusion and exclusion criteria for the studies reviewed were based on the PICOS (participants, interventions, comparators, outcomes, and study design) framework. The population included individuals using health care chatbots for medical history-taking. Interventions focused on chatbots designed to facilitate medical history-taking. The outcomes of interest were the feasibility, acceptance, and usability of chatbot-based medical history-taking. Studies not reporting on these outcomes were excluded. All study designs except conference papers were eligible for inclusion. Only English-language studies were considered. There were no specific restrictions on study duration. Key search terms included \"chatbot*,\" \"conversational agent*,\" \"virtual assistant,\" \"artificial intelligence chatbot,\" \"medical history,\" and \"history-taking.\" The quality of observational studies was classified using the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) criteria (eg, sample size, design, data collection, and follow-up). The RoB 2 (Risk of Bias) tool assessed areas and the levels of bias in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The review included 15 observational studies and 3 RCTs and synthesized evidence from different medical fields and populations. Chatbots systematically collect information through targeted queries and data retrieval, improving patient engagement and satisfaction. The results show that chatbots have great potential for history-taking and that the efficiency and accessibility of the health care system can be improved by 24/7 automated data collection. Bias assessments revealed that of the 15 observational studies, 5 (33%) studies were of high quality, 5 (33%) studies were of moderate quality, and 5 (33%) studies were of low quality. Of the RCTs, 2 had a low risk of bias, while 1 had a high risk.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This systematic review provides critical insights into the potential benefits and challenges of using chatbots for medical history-taking. The included studies showed that chatbots can increase patient engagement, streamline data collection, and improve health care decision-making. For effective integration into clinical practice, it is crucial to design user-friendly interfaces, ensure robust data security, and maintain empathetic patient-physician interactions. Future research should focus on refining chatbot algorithms, improving their emotional intelligence, and extending their application to different health care settings to realize their full potential in modern medicine.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42023410312; www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero.</p>","PeriodicalId":56334,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Medical Informatics","volume":"12 ","pages":"e56628"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11393511/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Medical Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/56628","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The integration of artificial intelligence and chatbot technology in health care has attracted significant attention due to its potential to improve patient care and streamline history-taking. As artificial intelligence-driven conversational agents, chatbots offer the opportunity to revolutionize history-taking, necessitating a comprehensive examination of their impact on medical practice.

Objective: This systematic review aims to assess the role, effectiveness, usability, and patient acceptance of chatbots in medical history-taking. It also examines potential challenges and future opportunities for integration into clinical practice.

Methods: A systematic search included PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE (via Ovid), CENTRAL, Scopus, and Open Science and covered studies through July 2024. The inclusion and exclusion criteria for the studies reviewed were based on the PICOS (participants, interventions, comparators, outcomes, and study design) framework. The population included individuals using health care chatbots for medical history-taking. Interventions focused on chatbots designed to facilitate medical history-taking. The outcomes of interest were the feasibility, acceptance, and usability of chatbot-based medical history-taking. Studies not reporting on these outcomes were excluded. All study designs except conference papers were eligible for inclusion. Only English-language studies were considered. There were no specific restrictions on study duration. Key search terms included "chatbot*," "conversational agent*," "virtual assistant," "artificial intelligence chatbot," "medical history," and "history-taking." The quality of observational studies was classified using the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) criteria (eg, sample size, design, data collection, and follow-up). The RoB 2 (Risk of Bias) tool assessed areas and the levels of bias in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Results: The review included 15 observational studies and 3 RCTs and synthesized evidence from different medical fields and populations. Chatbots systematically collect information through targeted queries and data retrieval, improving patient engagement and satisfaction. The results show that chatbots have great potential for history-taking and that the efficiency and accessibility of the health care system can be improved by 24/7 automated data collection. Bias assessments revealed that of the 15 observational studies, 5 (33%) studies were of high quality, 5 (33%) studies were of moderate quality, and 5 (33%) studies were of low quality. Of the RCTs, 2 had a low risk of bias, while 1 had a high risk.

Conclusions: This systematic review provides critical insights into the potential benefits and challenges of using chatbots for medical history-taking. The included studies showed that chatbots can increase patient engagement, streamline data collection, and improve health care decision-making. For effective integration into clinical practice, it is crucial to design user-friendly interfaces, ensure robust data security, and maintain empathetic patient-physician interactions. Future research should focus on refining chatbot algorithms, improving their emotional intelligence, and extending their application to different health care settings to realize their full potential in modern medicine.

Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42023410312; www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero.

通过病史采集聊天机器人改变医疗保健和未来方向:全面系统综述。
背景:由于人工智能和聊天机器人技术具有改善患者护理和简化病史采集的潜力,因此将其整合到医疗保健领域引起了广泛关注。作为人工智能驱动的对话代理,聊天机器人提供了彻底改变病史采集的机会,因此有必要全面研究其对医疗实践的影响:本系统综述旨在评估聊天机器人在病史采集中的作用、有效性、可用性和患者接受度。目的:本系统综述旨在评估聊天机器人在病史采集中的作用、有效性、可用性和患者接受度,并探讨将其融入临床实践的潜在挑战和未来机遇:系统性检索包括PubMed、Embase、MEDLINE(通过Ovid)、CENTRAL、Scopus和Open Science,涵盖截至2024年7月的研究。所审查研究的纳入和排除标准基于 PICOS(参与者、干预措施、比较者、结果和研究设计)框架。研究对象包括使用医疗聊天机器人采集病史的个人。干预措施侧重于旨在促进病史采集的聊天机器人。研究结果关注的是基于聊天机器人的病史采集的可行性、接受度和可用性。未报告这些结果的研究被排除在外。除会议论文外,所有研究设计均可纳入。仅考虑英语研究。对研究持续时间没有具体限制。关键搜索词包括 "聊天机器人*"、"对话代理*"、"虚拟助手"、"人工智能聊天机器人"、"病史 "和 "病史采集"。观察性研究的质量采用 STROBE(加强流行病学观察性研究报告)标准(如样本大小、设计、数据收集和随访)进行分类。RoB 2(偏倚风险)工具评估了随机对照试验(RCT)中存在偏倚的领域和程度:综述包括 15 项观察性研究和 3 项随机对照试验,并综合了来自不同医学领域和人群的证据。聊天机器人通过有针对性的查询和数据检索系统地收集信息,提高了患者的参与度和满意度。研究结果表明,聊天机器人在病史采集方面潜力巨大,全天候自动数据收集可提高医疗系统的效率和可及性。偏倚评估显示,在 15 项观察性研究中,5 项(33%)研究的质量较高,5 项(33%)研究的质量中等,5 项(33%)研究的质量较低。在随机对照研究中,2 项研究的偏倚风险较低,1 项研究的偏倚风险较高:本系统综述为了解使用聊天机器人采集病史的潜在益处和挑战提供了重要见解。纳入的研究表明,聊天机器人可以提高患者参与度、简化数据收集并改善医疗决策。要想有效地融入临床实践,关键是要设计用户友好的界面、确保强大的数据安全以及保持患者与医生之间的移情互动。未来的研究应侧重于完善聊天机器人算法、提高其情商,并将其应用扩展到不同的医疗环境,以充分发挥其在现代医学中的潜力:PERCORO CRD42023410312; www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JMIR Medical Informatics
JMIR Medical Informatics Medicine-Health Informatics
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
3.10%
发文量
173
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: JMIR Medical Informatics (JMI, ISSN 2291-9694) is a top-rated, tier A journal which focuses on clinical informatics, big data in health and health care, decision support for health professionals, electronic health records, ehealth infrastructures and implementation. It has a focus on applied, translational research, with a broad readership including clinicians, CIOs, engineers, industry and health informatics professionals. Published by JMIR Publications, publisher of the Journal of Medical Internet Research (JMIR), the leading eHealth/mHealth journal (Impact Factor 2016: 5.175), JMIR Med Inform has a slightly different scope (emphasizing more on applications for clinicians and health professionals rather than consumers/citizens, which is the focus of JMIR), publishes even faster, and also allows papers which are more technical or more formative than what would be published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信