Current Landscape and Future Directions for Mental Health Conversational Agents for Youth: Scoping Review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Conversational agents (CAs; chatbots) are systems with the ability to interact with users using natural human dialogue. They are increasingly used to support interactive knowledge discovery of sensitive topics such as mental health topics. While much of the research on CAs for mental health has focused on adult populations, the insights from such research may not apply to CAs for youth. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to comprehensively evaluate the state-of-the-art research on mental health CAs for youth. METHODS: Following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, we identified 39 peer-reviewed studies specific to mental health CAs designed for youth across 4 databases, including ProQuest, Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed. We conducted a scoping review of the literature to evaluate the characteristics of research on mental health CAs designed for youth, the design and computational considerations of mental health CAs for youth, and the evaluation outcomes reported in the research on mental health CAs for youth. RESULTS: We found that many mental health CAs (11/39, 28%) were designed as older peers to provide therapeutic or educational content to promote youth mental well-being. All CAs were designed based on expert knowledge, with a few that incorporated inputs from youth. The technical maturity of CAs was in its infancy, focusing on building prototypes with rule-based models to deliver prewritten content, with limited safety features to respond to imminent risk. Research findings suggest that while youth appreciate the 24/7 availability of friendly or empathetic conversation on sensitive topics with CAs, they found the content provided by CAs to be limited. Finally, we found that most (35/39, 90%) of the reviewed studies did not address the ethical aspects of mental health CAs, while youth were concerned about the privacy and confidentiality of their sensitive conversation data. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the need for researchers to continue to work together to align evidence-based research on mental health CAs for youth with lessons learned on how to best deliver these technologies to youth. Our review brings to light mental health CAs needing further development and evaluation. The new trend of large language model-based CAs can make such technologies more feasible. However, the privacy and safety of the systems should be prioritized. Although preliminary evidence shows positive trends in mental health CAs, long-term evaluative research with larger sample sizes and robust research designs is needed to validate their efficacy. More importantly, collaboration between youth and clinical experts is essential from the early design stages through to the final evaluation to develop safe, effective, and youth-centered mental health chatbots. Finally, best practices for risk mitigation and ethical development of CAs with and for youth are needed to promote their mental well-being.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,040 | 0,104 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,006 | 0,009 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,017 | 0,014 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,008 | 0,011 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,007 | 0,006 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,010 | 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».