Rosie, a Health Education Question-and-Answer Chatbot for New Mothers: Randomized Pilot Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Stark disparities exist in maternal and child outcomes and there is a need to provide timely and accurate health information. OBJECTIVE: In this pilot study, we assessed the feasibility and acceptability of a health chatbot for new mothers of color. METHODS: Rosie, a question-and-answer chatbot, was developed as a mobile app and is available to answer questions about pregnancy, parenting, and child development. From January 9, 2023, to February 9, 2023, participants were recruited using social media posts and through engagement with community organizations. Inclusion criteria included being aged ≥14 years, being a woman of color, and either being currently pregnant or having given birth within the past 6 months. Participants were randomly assigned to the Rosie treatment group (15/29, 52% received the Rosie app) or control group (14/29, 48% received a children's book each month) for 3 months. Those assigned to the treatment group could ask Rosie questions and receive an immediate response generated from Rosie's knowledgebase. Upon detection of a possible health emergency, Rosie sends emergency resources and relevant hotline information. In addition, a study staff member, who is a clinical social worker, reaches out to the participant within 24 hours to follow up. Preintervention and postintervention tests were completed to qualitatively and quantitatively evaluate Rosie and describe changes across key health outcomes, including postpartum depression and the frequency of emergency room visits. These measurements were used to inform the clinical trial's sample size calculations. RESULTS: Of 41 individuals who were screened and eligible, 31 (76%) enrolled and 29 (71%) were retained in the study. More than 87% (13/15) of Rosie treatment group members reported using Rosie daily (5/15, 33%) or weekly (8/15, 53%) across the 3-month study period. Most users reported that Rosie was easy to use (14/15, 93%) and provided responses quickly (13/15, 87%). The remaining issues identified included crashing of the app (8/15, 53%), and users were not satisfied with some of Rosie's answers (12/15, 80%). Mothers in both the Rosie treatment group and control group experienced a decline in depression scores from pretest to posttest periods, but the decline was statistically significant only among treatment group mothers (P=.008). In addition, a low proportion of treatment group infants had emergency room visits (1/11, 9%) compared with control group members (3/13, 23%). Nonetheless, no between-group differences reached statistical significance at P<.05. CONCLUSIONS: Rosie was found to be an acceptable, feasible, and appropriate intervention for ethnic and racial minority pregnant women and mothers of infants owing to the chatbot's ability to provide a personalized, flexible tool to increase the timeliness and accessibility of high-quality health information to individuals during a period of elevated health risks for the mother and child. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06053515; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06053515.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».