这个聊天机器人安全吗?对生成式人工智能心理健康聊天机器人进行批判性评估的呼吁。

Q2 Medicine
Acacia Parks, Eoin Travers, Ramesh Perera-Delcourt, Max Major, Marcos Economides, Phil Mullan
{"title":"这个聊天机器人安全吗?对生成式人工智能心理健康聊天机器人进行批判性评估的呼吁。","authors":"Acacia Parks, Eoin Travers, Ramesh Perera-Delcourt, Max Major, Marcos Economides, Phil Mullan","doi":"10.2196/69534","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Unlabelled: </strong>The proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI)-based mental health chatbots, such as those on platforms like OpenAI's GPT Store and Character. AI, raises issues of safety, effectiveness, and ethical use; they also raise an opportunity for patients and consumers to ensure AI tools clearly communicate how they meet their needs. While many of these tools claim to offer therapeutic advice, their unregulated status and lack of systematic evaluation create risks for users, particularly vulnerable individuals. This viewpoint article highlights the urgent need for a standardized framework to assess and demonstrate the safety, ethics, and evidence basis of AI chatbots used in mental health contexts. Drawing on clinical expertise, research, co-design experience, and the World Health Organization's guidance, the authors propose key evaluation criteria: adherence to ethical principles, evidence-based responses, conversational skills, safety protocols, and accessibility. Implementation challenges, including setting output criteria without one \"right answer,\" evaluating multiturn conversations, and involving experts for oversight at scale, are explored. The authors advocate for greater consumer engagement in chatbot evaluation to ensure that these tools address users' needs effectively and responsibly, emphasizing the ethical obligation of developers to prioritize safety and a strong base in empirical evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":36208,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Participatory Medicine","volume":"17 ","pages":"e69534"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12140500/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is This Chatbot Safe and Evidence-Based? A Call for the Critical Evaluation of Generative AI Mental Health Chatbots.\",\"authors\":\"Acacia Parks, Eoin Travers, Ramesh Perera-Delcourt, Max Major, Marcos Economides, Phil Mullan\",\"doi\":\"10.2196/69534\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Unlabelled: </strong>The proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI)-based mental health chatbots, such as those on platforms like OpenAI's GPT Store and Character. AI, raises issues of safety, effectiveness, and ethical use; they also raise an opportunity for patients and consumers to ensure AI tools clearly communicate how they meet their needs. While many of these tools claim to offer therapeutic advice, their unregulated status and lack of systematic evaluation create risks for users, particularly vulnerable individuals. This viewpoint article highlights the urgent need for a standardized framework to assess and demonstrate the safety, ethics, and evidence basis of AI chatbots used in mental health contexts. Drawing on clinical expertise, research, co-design experience, and the World Health Organization's guidance, the authors propose key evaluation criteria: adherence to ethical principles, evidence-based responses, conversational skills, safety protocols, and accessibility. Implementation challenges, including setting output criteria without one \\\"right answer,\\\" evaluating multiturn conversations, and involving experts for oversight at scale, are explored. The authors advocate for greater consumer engagement in chatbot evaluation to ensure that these tools address users' needs effectively and responsibly, emphasizing the ethical obligation of developers to prioritize safety and a strong base in empirical evidence.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36208,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Participatory Medicine\",\"volume\":\"17 \",\"pages\":\"e69534\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12140500/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Participatory Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2196/69534\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Participatory Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/69534","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

未标记:基于人工智能(AI)的心理健康聊天机器人的激增,例如OpenAI的GPT Store和Character等平台上的聊天机器人。人工智能引发了安全性、有效性和伦理使用问题;它们还为患者和消费者提供了一个机会,以确保人工智能工具清楚地传达它们如何满足他们的需求。虽然这些工具中有许多声称提供治疗建议,但它们不受监管的状态和缺乏系统评估给使用者,特别是弱势群体带来了风险。这篇观点文章强调了迫切需要一个标准化的框架来评估和展示人工智能聊天机器人在心理健康环境中的安全性、伦理性和证据基础。根据临床专业知识、研究、共同设计经验和世界卫生组织的指导,作者提出了关键的评估标准:遵守伦理原则、基于证据的反应、对话技巧、安全协议和可及性。本文探讨了实施方面的挑战,包括设置没有“正确答案”的输出标准,评估多回合对话,以及让专家进行大规模监督。作者主张更多的消费者参与到聊天机器人的评估中,以确保这些工具有效和负责任地满足用户的需求,强调开发人员的道德义务,优先考虑安全性和经验证据的坚实基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Is This Chatbot Safe and Evidence-Based? A Call for the Critical Evaluation of Generative AI Mental Health Chatbots.

Unlabelled: The proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI)-based mental health chatbots, such as those on platforms like OpenAI's GPT Store and Character. AI, raises issues of safety, effectiveness, and ethical use; they also raise an opportunity for patients and consumers to ensure AI tools clearly communicate how they meet their needs. While many of these tools claim to offer therapeutic advice, their unregulated status and lack of systematic evaluation create risks for users, particularly vulnerable individuals. This viewpoint article highlights the urgent need for a standardized framework to assess and demonstrate the safety, ethics, and evidence basis of AI chatbots used in mental health contexts. Drawing on clinical expertise, research, co-design experience, and the World Health Organization's guidance, the authors propose key evaluation criteria: adherence to ethical principles, evidence-based responses, conversational skills, safety protocols, and accessibility. Implementation challenges, including setting output criteria without one "right answer," evaluating multiturn conversations, and involving experts for oversight at scale, are explored. The authors advocate for greater consumer engagement in chatbot evaluation to ensure that these tools address users' needs effectively and responsibly, emphasizing the ethical obligation of developers to prioritize safety and a strong base in empirical evidence.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Participatory Medicine
Journal of Participatory Medicine Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信