Dataset Information

Artificial Intelligence and Chatbots in Psychiatry.

ABSTRACT: The utilization of artificial intelligence (AI) in psychiatry has risen over the past several years to meet the growing need for improved access to mental health solutions. Additionally, shortages of mental health providers during the COVID-19 pandemic have continued to exacerbate the burden of mental illness worldwide. AI applications already in existence include those enabled to assist with psychiatric diagnoses, symptom tracking, disease course prediction, and psychoeducation. Modalities of AI mental health care delivery include availability through the internet, smartphone applications, and digital gaming. Here we review emerging AI-based interventions in the form of chat and therapy bots, specifically conversational applications that teach the user emotional coping mechanisms and provide support for people with communication difficulties, computer generated images of faces that form the basis of avatar therapy, and intelligent animal-like robots with new advances in digital psychiatry. We discuss the implications of incorporating AI chatbots into clinical practice and offer perspectives on how these AI-based interventions will further impact the field of psychiatry.

SUBMITTER: Pham KT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8873348 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Artificial Intelligence and Chatbots in Psychiatry.

Pham Kay T KT Nabizadeh Amir A Selek Salih S

The Psychiatric quarterly 20220225 1

The utilization of artificial intelligence (AI) in psychiatry has risen over the past several years to meet the growing need for improved access to mental health solutions. Additionally, shortages of mental health providers during the COVID-19 pandemic have continued to exacerbate the burden of mental illness worldwide. AI applications already in existence include those enabled to assist with psychiatric diagnoses, symptom tracking, disease course prediction, and psychoeducation. Modalities of A ...[more]

PMID: 35212940

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundArtificial intelligence (AI)-based chatbots can offer personalized, engaging, and on-demand health promotion interventions.ObjectiveThe aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the feasibility, efficacy, and intervention characteristics of AI chatbots for promoting health behavior change.MethodsA comprehensive search was conducted in 7 bibliographic databases (PubMed, IEEE Xplore, ACM Digital Library, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Embase, and JMIR publications) for empirical articles published from 1980 to 2022 that evaluated the feasibility or efficacy of AI chatbots for behavior change. The screening, extraction, and analysis of the identified articles were performed by following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.ResultsOf the 15 included studies, several demonstrated the high efficacy of AI chatbots in promoting healthy lifestyles (n=6, 40%), smoking cessation (n=4, 27%), treatment or medication adherence (n=2, 13%), and reduction in substance misuse (n=1, 7%). However, there were mixed results regarding feasibility, acceptability, and usability. Selected behavior change theories and expert consultation were used to develop the behavior change strategies of AI chatbots, including goal setting, monitoring, real-time reinforcement or feedback, and on-demand support. Real-time user-chatbot interaction data, such as user preferences and behavioral performance, were collected on the chatbot platform to identify ways of providing personalized services. The AI chatbots demonstrated potential for scalability by deployment through accessible devices and platforms (eg, smartphones and Facebook Messenger). The participants also reported that AI chatbots offered a nonjudgmental space for communicating sensitive information. However, the reported results need to be interpreted with caution because of the moderate to high risk of internal validity, insufficient description of AI techniques, and limitation for generalizability.ConclusionsAI chatbots have demonstrated the efficacy of health behavior change interventions among large and diverse populations; however, future studies need to adopt robust randomized control trials to establish definitive conclusions.

Project description:ImportanceMultimodal artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots can process complex medical image and text-based information that may improve their accuracy as a clinical diagnostic and management tool compared with unimodal, text-only AI chatbots. However, the difference in medical accuracy of multimodal and text-only chatbots in addressing questions about clinical oncology cases remains to be tested.ObjectiveTo evaluate the utility of prompt engineering (zero-shot chain-of-thought) and compare the competency of multimodal and unimodal AI chatbots to generate medically accurate responses to questions about clinical oncology cases.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study benchmarked the medical accuracy of multiple-choice and free-text responses generated by AI chatbots in response to 79 questions about clinical oncology cases with images.ExposuresA unique set of 79 clinical oncology cases from JAMA Network Learning accessed on April 2, 2024, was posed to 10 AI chatbots.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was medical accuracy evaluated by the number of correct responses by each AI chatbot. Multiple-choice responses were marked as correct based on the ground-truth, correct answer. Free-text responses were rated by a team of oncology specialists in duplicate and marked as correct based on consensus or resolved by a review of a third oncology specialist.ResultsThis study evaluated 10 chatbots, including 3 multimodal and 7 unimodal chatbots. On the multiple-choice evaluation, the top-performing chatbot was chatbot 10 (57 of 79 [72.15%]), followed by the multimodal chatbot 2 (56 of 79 [70.89%]) and chatbot 5 (54 of 79 [68.35%]). On the free-text evaluation, the top-performing chatbots were chatbot 5, chatbot 7, and the multimodal chatbot 2 (30 of 79 [37.97%]), followed by chatbot 10 (29 of 79 [36.71%]) and chatbot 8 and the multimodal chatbot 3 (25 of 79 [31.65%]). The accuracy of multimodal chatbots decreased when tested on cases with multiple images compared with questions with single images. Nine out of 10 chatbots, including all 3 multimodal chatbots, demonstrated decreased accuracy of their free-text responses compared with multiple-choice responses to questions about cancer cases.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study of chatbot accuracy tested on clinical oncology cases, multimodal chatbots were not consistently more accurate than unimodal chatbots. These results suggest that further research is required to optimize multimodal chatbots to make more use of information from images to improve oncology-specific medical accuracy and reliability.

Project description:BackgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) chatbots have recently gained use in medical practice by health care practitioners. Interestingly, the output of these AI chatbots was found to have varying degrees of hallucination in content and references. Such hallucinations generate doubts about their output and their implementation.ObjectiveThe aim of our study was to propose a reference hallucination score (RHS) to evaluate the authenticity of AI chatbots' citations.MethodsSix AI chatbots were challenged with the same 10 medical prompts, requesting 10 references per prompt. The RHS is composed of 6 bibliographic items and the reference's relevance to prompts' keywords. RHS was calculated for each reference, prompt, and type of prompt (basic vs complex). The average RHS was calculated for each AI chatbot and compared across the different types of prompts and AI chatbots.ResultsBard failed to generate any references. ChatGPT 3.5 and Bing generated the highest RHS (score=11), while Elicit and SciSpace generated the lowest RHS (score=1), and Perplexity generated a middle RHS (score=7). The highest degree of hallucination was observed for reference relevancy to the prompt keywords (308/500, 61.6%), while the lowest was for reference titles (169/500, 33.8%). ChatGPT and Bing had comparable RHS (β coefficient=-0.069; P=.32), while Perplexity had significantly lower RHS than ChatGPT (β coefficient=-0.345; P<.001). AI chatbots generally had significantly higher RHS when prompted with scenarios or complex format prompts (β coefficient=0.486; P<.001).ConclusionsThe variation in RHS underscores the necessity for a robust reference evaluation tool to improve the authenticity of AI chatbots. Further, the variations highlight the importance of verifying their output and citations. Elicit and SciSpace had negligible hallucination, while ChatGPT and Bing had critical hallucination levels. The proposed AI chatbots' RHS could contribute to ongoing efforts to enhance AI's general reliability in medical research.

Project description:BackgroundChatbots empowered by artificial intelligence (AI) can increasingly engage in natural conversations and build relationships with users. Applying AI chatbots to lifestyle modification programs is one of the promising areas to develop cost-effective and feasible behavior interventions to promote physical activity and a healthy diet.ObjectiveThe purposes of this perspective paper are to present a brief literature review of chatbot use in promoting physical activity and a healthy diet, describe the AI chatbot behavior change model our research team developed based on extensive interdisciplinary research, and discuss ethical principles and considerations.MethodsWe conducted a preliminary search of studies reporting chatbots for improving physical activity and/or diet in four databases in July 2020. We summarized the characteristics of the chatbot studies and reviewed recent developments in human-AI communication research and innovations in natural language processing. Based on the identified gaps and opportunities, as well as our own clinical and research experience and findings, we propose an AI chatbot behavior change model.ResultsOur review found a lack of understanding around theoretical guidance and practical recommendations on designing AI chatbots for lifestyle modification programs. The proposed AI chatbot behavior change model consists of the following four components to provide such guidance: (1) designing chatbot characteristics and understanding user background; (2) building relational capacity; (3) building persuasive conversational capacity; and (4) evaluating mechanisms and outcomes. The rationale and evidence supporting the design and evaluation choices for this model are presented in this paper.ConclusionsAs AI chatbots become increasingly integrated into various digital communications, our proposed theoretical framework is the first step to conceptualize the scope of utilization in health behavior change domains and to synthesize all possible dimensions of chatbot features to inform intervention design and evaluation. There is a need for more interdisciplinary work to continue developing AI techniques to improve a chatbot's relational and persuasive capacities to change physical activity and diet behaviors with strong ethical principles.

Dataset Information

Artificial Intelligence and Chatbots in Psychiatry.

Publications

Artificial Intelligence and Chatbots in Psychiatry.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets