ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2022
Validity of Chatbot Use for Mental Health Assessment: Experimental Study.
Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Exploring global efforts in mental health screening and early detection.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Pooled it
- Empathic Conversational Agent Platform Designs and Their Evaluation in the Context of Mental Health: Systematic Review.JMIR mental health · 2024Pooled it
- Unlocking AI Chatbot Potential in Healthcare: Trust-Enhanced DeLone & McLean IS Success Model.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Exploring the potential of ChatGPT as a digital advisor in acute psychiatric crises: a feasibility study.Der Nervenarzt · 2026Article
- Charting the evolution of artificial intelligence mental health chatbots from rule-based systems to large language models: a systematic review.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2025Article
- Evaluation of correctness and reliability of GPT, Bard, and Bing chatbots' responses in basic life support scenarios.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Detecting Artificial Intelligence-Generated Versus Human-Written Medical Student Essays: Semirandomized Controlled Study.JMIR medical education · 2025Article
- Current Landscape and Future Directions for Mental Health Conversational Agents for Youth: Scoping Review.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- The Efficacy of Conversational AI in Rectifying the Theory-of-Mind and Autonomy Biases: Comparative Analysis.JMIR mental health · 2025Article
- The acceptability and effectiveness of artificial intelligence-based chatbot for hypertensive patients in community: protocol for a mixed-methods study.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Optimizing and Predicting Antidepressant Efficacy in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder Using Multi-Omics Analysis and the Opade AI Prediction Tools.Brain sciences · 2024Article
- An Artificial Intelligence-Based Virtual Human Avatar Application to Assess the Mental Health of Health Care Professionals: A Validation Study.Journal of medical extended reality · 2024Article
- A digital self-help tool to promote mental well-being for Ukrainians affected by war - Assessing predictors of stress.Neuroscience applied · 2024Article
- An Integrative Survey on Mental Health Conversational Agents to Bridge Computer Science and Medical Perspectives.Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · 2023Article
- Overview of Chatbots with special emphasis on artificial intelligence-enabled ChatGPT in medical science.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMental disorders in adolescence and young adulthood are major public health concerns. Digital tools such as text-based conversational agents (ie, chatbots) are a promising technology for facilitating mental health assessment. However, the human-like interaction style of chatbots may induce potential biases, such as socially desirable responding (SDR), and may require further effort to complete assessments.
objectiveThis study aimed to investigate the convergent and discriminant validity of chatbots for mental health assessments, the effect of assessment mode on SDR, and the effort required by participants for assessments using chatbots compared with established modes.
methodsIn a counterbalanced within-subject design, we assessed 2 different constructs-psychological distress (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale and Brief Symptom Inventory-18) and problematic alcohol use (Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-3)-in 3 modes (chatbot, paper-and-pencil, and web-based), and examined convergent and discriminant validity. In addition, we investigated the effect of mode on SDR, controlling for perceived sensitivity of items and individuals' tendency to respond in a socially desirable way, and we also assessed the perceived social presence of modes. Including a between-subject condition, we further investigated whether SDR is increased in chatbot assessments when applied in a self-report setting versus when human interaction may be expected. Finally, the effort (ie, complexity, difficulty, burden, and time) required to complete the assessments was investigated.
resultsA total of 146 young adults (mean age 24, SD 6.42 years; n=67, 45.9% female) were recruited from a research panel for laboratory experiments. The results revealed high positive correlations (all P<.001) of measures of the same construct across different modes, indicating the convergent validity of chatbot assessments. Furthermore, there were no correlations between the distinct constructs, indicating discriminant validity. Moreover, there were no differences in SDR between modes and whether human interaction was expected, although the perceived social presence of the chatbot mode was higher than that of the established modes (P<.001). Finally, greater effort (all P<.05) and more time were needed to complete chatbot assessments than for completing the established modes (P<.001).
conclusionsOur findings suggest that chatbots may yield valid results. Furthermore, an understanding of chatbot design trade-offs in terms of potential strengths (ie, increased social presence) and limitations (ie, increased effort) when assessing mental health were established.
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.