COVID-19 Vaccine Equity and Access: Case Study for Health Care Chatbots
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Disparities in COVID-19 information and vaccine access have emerged during the pandemic. Individuals from historically excluded communities (eg, Black and Latin American) experience disproportionately negative health outcomes related to COVID-19. Community gaps in COVID-19 education, social, and health care services (including vaccines) should be prioritized as a critical effort to end the pandemic. Misinformation created by the politicization of COVID-19 and related public health measures has magnified the pandemic's challenges, including access to health care, vaccination and testing efforts, as well as personal protective equipment. Information and Communication Technology (ICT) has been demonstrated to reduce the gaps of marginalization in education and access among communities. Chatbots are an increasingly present example of ICTs, particularly in health care and in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: This project aimed to (1) follow an inclusive and theoretically driven design process to develop and test a COVID-19 information ICT bilingual (English and Spanish) chatbot tool named "Ana" and (2) characterize and evaluate user experiences of these innovative technologies. METHODS: Ana was developed following a multitheoretical framework, and the project team was comprised of public health experts, behavioral scientists, community members, and medical team. A total of 7 iterations of ß chatbots were tested, and a total of 22 ß testers participated in this process. Content was curated primarily to provide users with factual answers to common questions about COVID-19. To ensure relevance of the content, topics were driven by community concerns and questions, as ascertained through research. Ana's repository of educational content was based on national and international organizations as well as interdisciplinary experts. In the context of this development and pilot project, we identified an evaluation framework to explore reach, engagement, and satisfaction. RESULTS: A total of 626 community members used Ana from August 2021 to March 2022. Among those participants, 346 used the English version, with an average of 43 users per month; and 280 participants used the Spanish version, with an average of 40 users monthly. Across all users, 63.87% (n=221) of English users and 22.14% (n=62) of Spanish users returned to use Ana at least once; 18.49% (n=64) among the English version users and 18.57% (n=52) among the Spanish version users reported their ranking. Positive ranking comprised the "smiley" and "loved" emojis, and negative ranking comprised the "neutral," "sad," and "mad" emojis. When comparing negative and positive experiences, the latter was higher across Ana's platforms (English: n=41, 64.06%; Spanish: n=41, 77.35%) versus the former (English: n=23, 35.93%; Spanish: n=12, 22.64%). CONCLUSIONS: This pilot project demonstrated the feasibility and capacity of an innovative ICT to share COVID-19 information within diverse communities. Creating a chatbot like Ana with bilingual content contributed to an equitable approach to address the lack of accessible COVID-19-related information.
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 | 0.008 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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".