Natalia S Dellavalle, Jessica R Ellis, Annie A Moore, Marlee Akerson, Matt Andazola, Eric G Campbell, Matthew DeCamp
{"title":"患者对医疗聊天机器人的需求:来自混合方法研究的见解。","authors":"Natalia S Dellavalle, Jessica R Ellis, Annie A Moore, Marlee Akerson, Matt Andazola, Eric G Campbell, Matthew DeCamp","doi":"10.1093/jamia/ocaf164","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To understand whether patients prefer chatbots for certain tasks in healthcare, and their motivations for doing so, recognizing that chatbots are already assisting patients with various healthcare tasks.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We conducted a mixed-methods study with patient-users of a healthcare system multi-task chatbot integrated in an electronic health record. We purposively oversampled by race or ethnicity to survey 617/3089 (response rate, 20.0%) chatbot users using de novo and validated survey items. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 46 patient-users and 2 chatbot developers between November 2022 and May 2024. We used modified grounded theory to analyze interviews, descriptive statistics and Chi-square tests to compare survey results, and mixed-methods techniques to integrate findings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patient-users preferred chatbots for administrative tasks to save providers' time, because of the chatbot availability, and to avoid unpleasant interactions. Some preferred to discuss sensitive tasks (such as mental health or gender-affirming care) with chatbots due to more privacy or anonymity and less embarrassment or judgment. Developer interviews corroborated this finding. Avoiding bias and using a preferred means of communication applied to all tasks. In surveys, patient-users were less likely to worry about being judged based on chatbot interactions (153/608, 25.2%) compared to interactions with a doctor (219/606, 36.1%) (P < .001). Patient-users preferred human clinicians for diagnostic tasks.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Patient-users appear to simultaneously prefer chatbots for simple tasks or sensitive ones, with diverse motivations. Whether chatbots best meet patient needs while balancing ethical tensions regarding access, privacy, judgment, and bias is unclear.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Future chatbot design must accommodate different and diverse patient preferences.</p>","PeriodicalId":50016,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What patients want from healthcare chatbots: insights from a mixed-methods study.\",\"authors\":\"Natalia S Dellavalle, Jessica R Ellis, Annie A Moore, Marlee Akerson, Matt Andazola, Eric G Campbell, Matthew DeCamp\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jamia/ocaf164\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To understand whether patients prefer chatbots for certain tasks in healthcare, and their motivations for doing so, recognizing that chatbots are already assisting patients with various healthcare tasks.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We conducted a mixed-methods study with patient-users of a healthcare system multi-task chatbot integrated in an electronic health record. We purposively oversampled by race or ethnicity to survey 617/3089 (response rate, 20.0%) chatbot users using de novo and validated survey items. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 46 patient-users and 2 chatbot developers between November 2022 and May 2024. We used modified grounded theory to analyze interviews, descriptive statistics and Chi-square tests to compare survey results, and mixed-methods techniques to integrate findings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patient-users preferred chatbots for administrative tasks to save providers' time, because of the chatbot availability, and to avoid unpleasant interactions. Some preferred to discuss sensitive tasks (such as mental health or gender-affirming care) with chatbots due to more privacy or anonymity and less embarrassment or judgment. Developer interviews corroborated this finding. Avoiding bias and using a preferred means of communication applied to all tasks. In surveys, patient-users were less likely to worry about being judged based on chatbot interactions (153/608, 25.2%) compared to interactions with a doctor (219/606, 36.1%) (P < .001). Patient-users preferred human clinicians for diagnostic tasks.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Patient-users appear to simultaneously prefer chatbots for simple tasks or sensitive ones, with diverse motivations. Whether chatbots best meet patient needs while balancing ethical tensions regarding access, privacy, judgment, and bias is unclear.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Future chatbot design must accommodate different and diverse patient preferences.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50016,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocaf164\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocaf164","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
What patients want from healthcare chatbots: insights from a mixed-methods study.
Objectives: To understand whether patients prefer chatbots for certain tasks in healthcare, and their motivations for doing so, recognizing that chatbots are already assisting patients with various healthcare tasks.
Materials and methods: We conducted a mixed-methods study with patient-users of a healthcare system multi-task chatbot integrated in an electronic health record. We purposively oversampled by race or ethnicity to survey 617/3089 (response rate, 20.0%) chatbot users using de novo and validated survey items. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 46 patient-users and 2 chatbot developers between November 2022 and May 2024. We used modified grounded theory to analyze interviews, descriptive statistics and Chi-square tests to compare survey results, and mixed-methods techniques to integrate findings.
Results: Patient-users preferred chatbots for administrative tasks to save providers' time, because of the chatbot availability, and to avoid unpleasant interactions. Some preferred to discuss sensitive tasks (such as mental health or gender-affirming care) with chatbots due to more privacy or anonymity and less embarrassment or judgment. Developer interviews corroborated this finding. Avoiding bias and using a preferred means of communication applied to all tasks. In surveys, patient-users were less likely to worry about being judged based on chatbot interactions (153/608, 25.2%) compared to interactions with a doctor (219/606, 36.1%) (P < .001). Patient-users preferred human clinicians for diagnostic tasks.
Discussion: Patient-users appear to simultaneously prefer chatbots for simple tasks or sensitive ones, with diverse motivations. Whether chatbots best meet patient needs while balancing ethical tensions regarding access, privacy, judgment, and bias is unclear.
Conclusion: Future chatbot design must accommodate different and diverse patient preferences.
期刊介绍:
JAMIA is AMIA''s premier peer-reviewed journal for biomedical and health informatics. Covering the full spectrum of activities in the field, JAMIA includes informatics articles in the areas of clinical care, clinical research, translational science, implementation science, imaging, education, consumer health, public health, and policy. JAMIA''s articles describe innovative informatics research and systems that help to advance biomedical science and to promote health. Case reports, perspectives and reviews also help readers stay connected with the most important informatics developments in implementation, policy and education.