Adoption and perception of LLM-based chatbots in health care: an exploratory cross-sectional survey of individuals with rheumatic diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The rapid mainstream uptake of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, particularly large language model (LLM)-based chatbots, have sparked interest in their potential role in healthcare. Despite technological advancements, little is known about the current utilization of LLM chatbots among individuals with rheumatic diseases. This study aimed to investigate the adoption of and perceptions towards LLM chatbots among individuals with rheumatic disease, along with associated sociodemographic factors. Methods: An exploratory cross-sectional survey was conducted with participants recruited both online, via Arthritis Care Experts' digital and social media platforms, and in person from rheumatology clinics in Edmonton, AB, Canada. Respondents completed an 18-item questionnaire assessing LLM chatbot use for work and in daily life, including for health-related purposes, alongside sociodemographic factors. Chi-squared tests were used to assess crude associations and multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the adjusted odds ratios of sociodemographic factors and LLM chatbot use. Results: Of 270 respondents (109 online, 161 in person), 119 (44%) reported using LLM chatbots, with 40 respondents (15%) using them for health-related reasons. LLM chatbots were primarily used for general health queries rather than specific or personal health questions. Younger age and a more liberal political view were associated with LLM chatbot use, while gender, education, income, ethnocultural background and language spoken were not. Conclusion: This study showed that a relevant number of individuals with rheumatic diseases are already using LLM chatbots, including for health-related reasons. These findings should prompt urgent efforts to address accuracy, safety and equity concerns regarding the utilization of LLM chatbots, particularly in the domain of rheumatology.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".