ArticleJMIR human factors2022
Evaluating Voice Assistants' Responses to COVID-19 Vaccination in Portuguese: Quality Assessment.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Voice Assistants' Responses to Questions About the COVID-19 Vaccine: National Cross-sectional Study.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Ensuring Interrater Reliability When Evaluating Voice Assistants. Comment on "Evaluating Voice Assistants' Responses to COVID-19 Vaccination in Portuguese: Quality Assessment".JMIR human factors · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVoice assistants (VAs) are devices that respond to human voices and can be commanded to do a variety of tasks. Nowadays, VAs are being used to obtain health information, which has become a critical point of analysis for researchers in terms of question understanding and quality of response. Particularly, the COVID-19 pandemic has and still is severely affecting people worldwide, which demands studies on how VAs can be used as a tool to provide useful information.
objectiveThis work aimed to perform a quality analysis of different VAs' responses regarding the actual and important subject of COVID-19 vaccines. We focused on this important subject since vaccines are now available and society has urged for the population to be rapidly immunized.
methodsThe proposed study was based on questions that were collected from the official World Health Organization website. These questions were submitted to the 5 dominant VAs (Alexa, Bixby, Cortana, Google Assistant, and Siri), and responses were evaluated according to a rubric based on the literature. We focused this study on the Portuguese language as an additional contribution, since previous works are mainly focused on the English language, and we believe that VAs cannot be optimized to foreign languages.
resultsResults showed that Google Assistant has a better overall performance, and only this VA and Samsung Bixby achieved high scores on question understanding in the Portuguese language. Regarding the obtained answers, the study also showed the best Google Assistant overall performance.
conclusionsUnder the urgent context of COVID-19 vaccination, this work can help to understand how VAs must be improved to be more useful to the society and how careful people must be when considering VAs as a source of health information. VAs have been demonstrated to perform well regarding comprehension and user-friendliness. However, this work has found that they must be better integrated to their information sources to be useful as health information tools.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.