MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385827554 · doi:10.2196/42506

A Beta-Prototype Chatbot for Increasing Health Literacy of Patients With Decompensated Cirrhosis: Usability Study

2023· article· en· W4385827554 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jessica Au, Caitlin Falloon, Ayngaran Ravi, Phil Ha, Suong Le

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Human Factors · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUsabilityHealth literacyDigital healthChatbotMedicineLiteracyHealth careHealth informaticsPsychologyNursingComputer sciencePublic healthWorld Wide WebHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Health literacy is low among patients with chronic liver disease (CLD) and associated with poor health outcomes and increased health care use. Lucy LiverBot, an artificial intelligence chatbot was created by a multidisciplinary team at Monash Health, Australia, to improve health literacy and self-efficacy in patients with decompensated CLD. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore users' experience with Lucy LiverBot using an unmoderated, in-person, qualitative test. METHODS: Lucy LiverBot is a simple, low cost, and scalable digital intervention, which was at the beta prototype development phase at the time of usability testing. The concept and prototype development was realized in 2 phases: concept development and usability testing. We conducted a mixed methods study to assess usability of Lucy LiverBot as a tool for health literacy education among ambulatory and hospitalized patients with decompensated CLD at Monash Health. Patients were provided with free reign to interact with Lucy LiverBot on an iPad device under moderator observation. A 3-part survey (preuser, user, and postuser) was developed using the Unified Acceptance Theory Framework to capture the user experience. RESULTS: There were 20 participants with a median age of 55.5 (IQR 46.0-60.5) years, 55% (n=11) of them were female, and 85% (n=17) of them were White. In total, 35% (n=7) of them reported having difficulty reading and understanding written medical information. Alcohol was the predominant etiology in 70% (n=14) of users. Participants actively engaged with Lucy LiverBot and identified it as a potential educational tool and device that could act as a social companion to improve well-being. In total, 25% (n=5) of them reported finding it difficult to learn about their health problems and 20% (n=4) of them found it difficult to find medical information they could trust. Qualitative interviews revealed the conversational nature of Lucy LiverBot was considered highly appealing with improvement in mental health and well-being reported as an unintended benefit of Lucy LiverBot. Patients who had been managing their liver cirrhosis for several years identified that they would be less likely to use Lucy LiverBot, but that it would have been more useful at the time of their diagnosis. Overall, Lucy LiverBot was perceived as a reliable and trustworthy source of information. CONCLUSIONS: Lucy LiverBot was well received and may be used to improve health literacy and address barriers to health care provision in patients with decompensated CLD. The study revealed important feedback that has been used to further optimize Lucy LiverBot. Further acceptability and validation studies are being undertaken to investigate whether Lucy LiverBot can improve clinical outcomes and health related quality of life in patients with decompensated CLD.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.089
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.390 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Human FactorsSame topicHealth Literacy and Information AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207