When Chatbots Meet Patients: One-Year Prospective Study of Conversations Between Patients With Breast Cancer and a Chatbot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A chatbot is a software that interacts with users by simulating a human conversation through text or voice via smartphones or computers. It could be a solution to follow up with patients during their disease while saving time for health care providers. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate one year of conversations between patients with breast cancer and a chatbot. METHODS: Wefight Inc designed a chatbot (Vik) to empower patients with breast cancer and their relatives. Vik responds to the fears and concerns of patients with breast cancer using personalized insights through text messages. We conducted a prospective study by analyzing the users' and patients' data, their usage duration, their interest in the various educational contents proposed, and their level of interactivity. Patients were women with breast cancer or under remission. RESULTS: A total of 4737 patients were included. Results showed that an average of 132,970 messages exchanged per month was observed between patients and the chatbot, Vik. Thus, we calculated the average medication adherence rate over 4 weeks by using a prescription reminder function, and we showed that the more the patients used the chatbot, the more adherent they were. Patients regularly left positive comments and recommended Vik to their friends. The overall satisfaction was 93.95% (900/958). When asked what Vik meant to them and what Vik brought them, 88.00% (943/958) said that Vik provided them with support and helped them track their treatment effectively. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that it is possible to obtain support through a chatbot since Vik improved the medication adherence rate of patients with breast cancer.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".