Co-Constructing CHAMP, an Artificial Intelligence Chatbot for Pediatric Infectious Symptoms Management: Protocol for a Multi-Phase Participatory Study (Preprint)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND Acute infectious symptoms are leading causes of pediatric emergency department (ED) visits in Canada, many of which are low-acuity and could be safely managed at home. Artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots offer a promising avenue for delivering accessible, evidence-based guidance to support families in managing these symptoms. OBJECTIVE To adapt and co-construct CHAMP (CHatbot to Assist the Management of Pediatric patients), an AI chatbot to support patients and families with acute pediatric infectious symptoms. CHAMP aims to deliver timely, tailored, and validated health information to support safe at-home self-management and informed care-seeking. METHODS This multi-phase, mixed-methods participatory study will be conducted at the Montreal Children’s Hospital in Montreal, Canada. A Co-Construction Committee comprised of youth, parents, caregivers, and partners will be engaged as co-researchers. Eligible participants will include: (1) youth aged 14-17 years and (2) parents and caregivers of children aged 0-17 years. The study comprises five phases. Phase 1 involves a qualitative needs assessment using focus groups with 20 participants to explore informational needs, preferences, and concerns about pediatric infections and AI chatbot use. Phase 2 focuses on co-constructing and validating CHAMP’s knowledge database through 3-5 workshops. Co-researchers will review pediatric clinical guidelines, map care questions and decision-making processes, and shape CHAMP’s conversational framework. Phase 3 consists of iterative prototyping and testing through 3-5 workshops. Co-researchers will engage in prototyping and scenario testing, alongside preliminary usability and acceptability assessments. Phase 4 examines equity and accessibility through focus groups with 20 participants at risk of digital exclusion as well as multilingual evaluation of an automated large language model-based translation layer. Phase 5 employs collaborative ethnography to explore the process of participatory co-construction and its impact on CHAMP’s design. RESULTS Funding was secured in 2024 and REB approval was obtained in December 2024. As of December 2025, the Co-Construction Committee is being assembled and Phase 1 recruitment is underway. CONCLUSIONS This study will produce a functioning CHAMP prototype grounded in participatory, equitable, and responsible pediatric AI development. Findings will inform usability testing and an implementation-effectiveness evaluation, contributing to best practices for co-constructed, pediatric-centered AI health tools. By providing timely, tailored, and validated health information on acute infections, CHAMP may support safe at-home self-management, reduce preventable ED visits, ensure at-risk children are directed to appropriate care, and improve patient and family healthcare experiences. CLINICALTRIAL NCT05789901
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 | 0.060 | 0.051 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.074 | 0.016 |
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".