Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34132644›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2021

Development of a Positive Body Image Chatbot (KIT) With Young People and Parents/Carers: Qualitative Focus Group Study.

Francesca Beilharz, Suku Sukunesan, Susan L Rossell, Jayashri Kulkarni, Gemma Sharp

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

44 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Leveraging Technology to Enhance Eating Disorder Treatment Outcomes.The Psychiatric clinics of North America · 2026
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Francesca BeilharzMonash Alfred Psychiatry Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3241-2558
Suku SukunesanSwinburne Business School, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8563-3469
Susan L RossellCentre for Mental Health, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7415-8252
Jayashri KulkarniMonash Alfred Psychiatry Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3875-5623
Gemma SharpMonash Alfred Psychiatry Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9946-518X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBody image and eating disorders represent a significant public health concern; however, many affected individuals never access appropriate treatment. Conversational agents or chatbots reflect a unique opportunity to target those affected online by providing psychoeducation and coping skills, thus filling the gap in service provision.

objectiveA world-first body image chatbot called "KIT" was designed. The aim of this study was to assess preliminary acceptability and feasibility via the collection of qualitative feedback from young people and parents/carers regarding the content, structure, and design of the chatbot, in accordance with an agile methodology strategy. The chatbot was developed in collaboration with Australia's national eating disorder support organization, the Butterfly Foundation.

methodsA conversation decision tree was designed that offered psychoeducational information on body image and eating disorders, as well as evidence-based coping strategies. A version of KIT was built as a research prototype to deliver these conversations. Six focus groups were conducted using online semistructured interviews to seek feedback on the KIT prototype. This included four groups of people seeking help for themselves (n=17; age 13-18 years) and two groups of parents/carers (n=8; age 46-57 years). Participants provided feedback on the cartoon chatbot character design, as well as the content, structure, and design of the chatbot webchat.

resultsThematic analyses identified the following three main themes from the six focus groups: (1) chatbot character and design, (2) content presentation, and (3) flow. Overall, the participants provided positive feedback regarding KIT, with both young people and parents/carers generally providing similar reflections. The participants approved of KIT's character and engagement. Specific suggestions were made regarding the brevity and tone to increase KIT's interactivity.

conclusionsFocus groups provided overall positive qualitative feedback regarding the content, structure, and design of the body image chatbot. Incorporating the feedback of lived experience from both individuals and parents/carers allowed the refinement of KIT in the development phase as per an iterative agile methodology. Further research is required to evaluate KIT's efficacy.

Indexed as

Body ImageCaregiversAdolescentFocus GroupsHumansMiddle AgedParentsQualitative Researchartificial intelligencebody imagechatbotconversational agentdesigndigital healtheating disordermental health

Identifiers

PMID34132644
PMCPMC8277317

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.