在精神卫生保健中使用生成式人工智能聊天机器人的从业者观点:混合方法研究。

IF 3 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
JMIR Human Factors Pub Date : 2025-09-16 DOI:10.2196/71065
Jessie Goldie, Simon Dennis, Lyndsey Hipgrave, Amanda Coleman
{"title":"在精神卫生保健中使用生成式人工智能聊天机器人的从业者观点:混合方法研究。","authors":"Jessie Goldie, Simon Dennis, Lyndsey Hipgrave, Amanda Coleman","doi":"10.2196/71065","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Generative artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots have the potential to improve mental health care for practitioners and clients. Evidence demonstrates that AI chatbots can assist with tasks such as documentation, research, counseling, and therapeutic exercises. However, research examining practitioners' perspectives is limited.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This mixed-methods study investigates: (1) practitioners' perspectives on different uses of generative AI chatbots; (2) their likelihood of recommending chatbots to clients; and (3) whether recommendation likelihood increases after viewing a demonstration.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants were 23 mental health practitioners, including 17 females and 6 males, with a mean age of 39.39 (SD 16.20) years. In 45-minute interviews, participants selected their 3 most helpful uses of chatbots from 11 options and rated their likelihood of recommending chatbots to clients on a Likert scale before and after an 11-minute chatbot demonstration.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Binomial tests found that Generating case notes was selected at greater-than-chance levels ( 15/23, 65%; P=.001), while Support with session planning (P=.86) and Identifying and suggesting literature (P=.10) were not. Although 55% (12/23) were likely to recommend chatbots to clients, a binomial test found no significant difference from the 50% threshold (P=.74). A paired samples t test found that recommendation likelihood increased significantly (19/23, 83%; P=.002) from predemonstration to postdemonstration.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Findings suggest practitioners favor administrative uses of generative AI and are more likely to recommend chatbots to clients after exposure. This study highlights a need for practitioner education and guidelines to support safe and effective AI integration in mental health care.</p>","PeriodicalId":36351,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Human Factors","volume":"12 ","pages":"e71065"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12440320/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Practitioner Perspectives on the Uses of Generative AI Chatbots in Mental Health Care: Mixed Methods Study.\",\"authors\":\"Jessie Goldie, Simon Dennis, Lyndsey Hipgrave, Amanda Coleman\",\"doi\":\"10.2196/71065\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Generative artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots have the potential to improve mental health care for practitioners and clients. Evidence demonstrates that AI chatbots can assist with tasks such as documentation, research, counseling, and therapeutic exercises. However, research examining practitioners' perspectives is limited.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This mixed-methods study investigates: (1) practitioners' perspectives on different uses of generative AI chatbots; (2) their likelihood of recommending chatbots to clients; and (3) whether recommendation likelihood increases after viewing a demonstration.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants were 23 mental health practitioners, including 17 females and 6 males, with a mean age of 39.39 (SD 16.20) years. In 45-minute interviews, participants selected their 3 most helpful uses of chatbots from 11 options and rated their likelihood of recommending chatbots to clients on a Likert scale before and after an 11-minute chatbot demonstration.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Binomial tests found that Generating case notes was selected at greater-than-chance levels ( 15/23, 65%; P=.001), while Support with session planning (P=.86) and Identifying and suggesting literature (P=.10) were not. Although 55% (12/23) were likely to recommend chatbots to clients, a binomial test found no significant difference from the 50% threshold (P=.74). A paired samples t test found that recommendation likelihood increased significantly (19/23, 83%; P=.002) from predemonstration to postdemonstration.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Findings suggest practitioners favor administrative uses of generative AI and are more likely to recommend chatbots to clients after exposure. This study highlights a need for practitioner education and guidelines to support safe and effective AI integration in mental health care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36351,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JMIR Human Factors\",\"volume\":\"12 \",\"pages\":\"e71065\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12440320/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JMIR Human Factors\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2196/71065\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Human Factors","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/71065","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:生成式人工智能(AI)聊天机器人有可能改善从业者和客户的精神卫生保健。有证据表明,人工智能聊天机器人可以协助完成文档、研究、咨询和治疗练习等任务。然而,研究从业者的观点是有限的。目的:本混合方法研究调查:(1)从业者对生成式AI聊天机器人不同用途的看法;(2)向客户推荐聊天机器人的可能性;(3)观看演示后推荐可能性是否增加。方法:研究对象为23名心理卫生从业人员,其中女性17人,男性6人,平均年龄39.39岁(SD 16.20)。在45分钟的访谈中,参与者从11个选项中选择了3个对聊天机器人最有帮助的用途,并在11分钟的聊天机器人演示之前和之后,用李克特量表评估他们向客户推荐聊天机器人的可能性。结果:二项检验发现,生成病例笔记被选中的概率高于随机水平(15/ 23,65%;P=.001),而支持会话计划(P=.86)和识别和建议文献(P=.10)则没有被选中。虽然55%(12/23)的人可能会向客户推荐聊天机器人,但二项检验发现与50%的阈值没有显著差异(P= 0.74)。配对样本t检验发现,从论证前到论证后,推荐可能性显著增加(19/ 23,83%;P= 0.002)。结论:研究结果表明,从业者倾向于将生成式人工智能用于管理,并且在接触后更有可能向客户推荐聊天机器人。这项研究强调了从业者教育和指导的必要性,以支持在精神卫生保健中安全有效地整合人工智能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Practitioner Perspectives on the Uses of Generative AI Chatbots in Mental Health Care: Mixed Methods Study.

Practitioner Perspectives on the Uses of Generative AI Chatbots in Mental Health Care: Mixed Methods Study.

Practitioner Perspectives on the Uses of Generative AI Chatbots in Mental Health Care: Mixed Methods Study.

Practitioner Perspectives on the Uses of Generative AI Chatbots in Mental Health Care: Mixed Methods Study.

Background: Generative artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots have the potential to improve mental health care for practitioners and clients. Evidence demonstrates that AI chatbots can assist with tasks such as documentation, research, counseling, and therapeutic exercises. However, research examining practitioners' perspectives is limited.

Objective: This mixed-methods study investigates: (1) practitioners' perspectives on different uses of generative AI chatbots; (2) their likelihood of recommending chatbots to clients; and (3) whether recommendation likelihood increases after viewing a demonstration.

Methods: Participants were 23 mental health practitioners, including 17 females and 6 males, with a mean age of 39.39 (SD 16.20) years. In 45-minute interviews, participants selected their 3 most helpful uses of chatbots from 11 options and rated their likelihood of recommending chatbots to clients on a Likert scale before and after an 11-minute chatbot demonstration.

Results: Binomial tests found that Generating case notes was selected at greater-than-chance levels ( 15/23, 65%; P=.001), while Support with session planning (P=.86) and Identifying and suggesting literature (P=.10) were not. Although 55% (12/23) were likely to recommend chatbots to clients, a binomial test found no significant difference from the 50% threshold (P=.74). A paired samples t test found that recommendation likelihood increased significantly (19/23, 83%; P=.002) from predemonstration to postdemonstration.

Conclusions: Findings suggest practitioners favor administrative uses of generative AI and are more likely to recommend chatbots to clients after exposure. This study highlights a need for practitioner education and guidelines to support safe and effective AI integration in mental health care.

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
JMIR Human Factors
JMIR Human Factors Medicine-Health Informatics
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
3.70%
发文量
123
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