AI Conversational Agent to Improve Varenicline Adherence: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Feasibility Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Varenicline is a pharmacological intervention for tobacco dependence that is safe and effective in facilitating smoking cessation. Enhanced adherence to varenicline augments the probability of prolonged smoking abstinence. However, research has shown that one-third of people who use varenicline are nonadherent by the second week. There is evidence showing that behavioral support helps with medication adherence. We have designed an artificial intelligence (AI) conversational agent or health bot, called "ChatV," based on evidence of what works as well as what varenicline is, that can provide these supports. ChatV is an evidence-based, patient- and health care provider-informed health bot to improve adherence to varenicline. ChatV has been programmed to provide medication reminders, answer questions about varenicline and smoking cessation, and track medication intake and the number of cigarettes. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore the feasibility of the ChatV health bot, to examine if it is used as intended, and to determine the appropriateness of proceeding with a randomized controlled trial. METHODS: We will conduct a mixed methods feasibility study where we will pilot-test ChatV with 40 participants. Participants will be provided with a standard 12-week varenicline regimen and access to ChatV. Passive data collection will include adoption measures (how often participants use the chatbot, what features they used, when did they use it, etc). In addition, participants will complete questionnaires (at 1, 4, 8, and 12 weeks) assessing self-reported smoking status and varenicline adherence, as well as questions regarding the acceptability, appropriateness, and usability of the chatbot, and participate in an interview assessing acceptability, appropriateness, fidelity, and adoption. We will use "stop, amend, and go" progression criteria for pilot studies to decide if a randomized controlled trial is a reasonable next step and what modifications are required. A health equity lens will be adopted during participant recruitment and data analysis to understand and address the differences in uptake and use of this digital health solution among diverse sociodemographic groups. The taxonomy of implementation outcomes will be used to assess feasibility, that is, acceptability, appropriateness, fidelity, adoption, and usability. In addition, medication adherence and smoking cessation will be measured to assess the preliminary treatment effect. Interview data will be analyzed using the framework analysis method. RESULTS: Participant enrollment for the study will begin in January 2024. CONCLUSIONS: By using predetermined progression criteria, the results of this preliminary study will inform the determination of whether to advance toward a larger randomized controlled trial to test the effectiveness of the health bot. Additionally, this study will explore the acceptability, appropriateness, fidelity, adoption, and usability of the health bot. These insights will be instrumental in refining the intervention and the health bot. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05997901; https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05997901. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/53556.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".