MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390351352 · doi:10.2196/54668

Adapting and Evaluating an AI-Based Chatbot Through Patient and Stakeholder Engagement to Provide Information for Different Health Conditions: Master Protocol for an Adaptive Platform Trial (the MARVIN Chatbots Study)

2023· article· en· W4390351352 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Yuanchao Ma, Sofiane Achiche, Marie‐Pascale Pomey, Jesseca Paquette, Nesrine Adjtoutah, Serge Vicente, Kim Engler, Moustafa Laymouna, David Lessard, Benoît Lemire, Jamil Asselah, Rachel Therrien, Esli Osmanlliu, Yann Joly, Bertrand Lebouché

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsMontreal Children's HospitalMcGill UniversityPolytechnique MontréalUniversité de MontréalMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChatbotPreprintProtocol (science)Computer scienceMedical educationStakeholderWorld Wide WebData sciencePsychologyMedicineAlternative medicinePublic relations

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence (AI)-based chatbots could help address some of the challenges patients face in acquiring information essential to their self-health management, including unreliable sources and overburdened health care professionals. Research to ensure the proper design, implementation, and uptake of chatbots is imperative. Inclusive digital health research and responsible AI integration into health care require active and sustained patient and stakeholder engagement, yet corresponding activities and guidance are limited for this purpose. OBJECTIVE: In response, this manuscript presents a master protocol for the development, testing, and implementation of a chatbot family in partnership with stakeholders. This protocol aims to help efficiently translate an initial chatbot intervention (MARVIN) to multiple health domains and populations. METHODS: The MARVIN chatbots study has an adaptive platform trial design consisting of multiple parallel individual chatbot substudies with four common objectives: (1) co-construct a tailored AI chatbot for a specific health care setting, (2) assess its usability with a small sample of participants, (3) measure implementation outcomes (usability, acceptability, appropriateness, adoption, and fidelity) within a large sample, and (4) evaluate the impact of patient and stakeholder partnerships on chatbot development. For objective 1, a needs assessment will be conducted within the setting, involving four 2-hour focus groups with 5 participants each. Then, a co-construction design committee will be formed with patient partners, health care professionals, and researchers who will participate in 6 workshops for chatbot development, testing, and improvement. For objective 2, a total of 30 participants will interact with the prototype for 3 weeks and assess its usability through a survey and 3 focus groups. Positive usability outcomes will lead to the initiation of objective 3, whereby the public will be able to access the chatbot for a 12-month real-world implementation study using web-based questionnaires to measure usability, acceptability, and appropriateness for 150 participants and meta-use data to inform adoption and fidelity. After each objective, for objective 4, focus groups will be conducted with the design committee to better understand their perspectives on the engagement process. RESULTS: From July 2022 to October 2023, this master protocol led to four substudies conducted at the McGill University Health Centre or the Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (both in Montreal, Quebec, Canada): (1) MARVIN for HIV (large-scale implementation expected in mid-2024), (2) MARVIN-Pharma for community pharmacists providing HIV care (usability study planned for mid-2024), (3) MARVINA for breast cancer, and (4) MARVIN-CHAMP for pediatric infectious conditions (both in preparation, with development to begin in early 2024). CONCLUSIONS: This master protocol offers an approach to chatbot development in partnership with patients and health care professionals that includes a comprehensive assessment of implementation outcomes. It also contributes to best practice recommendations for patient and stakeholder engagement in digital health research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05789901; https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05789901. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/54668.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.075
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.104
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0750.104
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.008

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 head0.813
GPT teacher head0.671
Teacher spread0.141 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations19
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207