Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37801342›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2023

Acceptability of a Pain History Assessment and Education Chatbot (Dolores) Across Age Groups in Populations With Chronic Pain: Development and Pilot Testing.

Nicole Emma Andrews, David Ireland, Pranavie Vijayakumar, Lyza Burvill, Elizabeth Hay, Daria Westerman, Tanya Rose, Mikaela Schlumpf, Jenny Strong, Andrew Claus

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Moving towards the use of artificial intelligence in pain management.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. [Digital treatment of fibromyalgia].Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 2025
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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

10 authors.

Nicole Emma AndrewsRECOVER Injury Research Centre, The University of Queensland, Herston, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7739-1738
David IrelandAustralian eHealth Research Centre, The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Herston, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2189-4624
Pranavie VijayakumarAustralian eHealth Research Centre, The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Herston, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0570-8804
Lyza BurvillSchool of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-7856-4511
Elizabeth HaySchool of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6499-5519
Daria WestermanQueensland Interdisciplinary Paediatric Persistent Pain Service, Queensland Children's Hospital, South Brisbane, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8845-3984
Tanya RoseSchool of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5357-8426
Mikaela SchlumpfQueensland Interdisciplinary Paediatric Persistent Pain Service, Queensland Children's Hospital, South Brisbane, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7372-3689
Jenny StrongTess Cramond Pain and Research Centre, The Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Metro North Hospital and Health Service, Herston, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9367-8755
Andrew ClausTess Cramond Pain and Research Centre, The Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Metro North Hospital and Health Service, Herston, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4030-9697

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe delivery of education on pain neuroscience and the evidence for different treatment approaches has become a key component of contemporary persistent pain management. Chatbots, or more formally conversation agents, are increasingly being used in health care settings due to their versatility in providing interactive and individualized approaches to both capture and deliver information. Research focused on the acceptability of diverse chatbot formats can assist in developing a better understanding of the educational needs of target populations.

objectiveThis study aims to detail the development and initial pilot testing of a multimodality pain education chatbot (Dolores) that can be used across different age groups and investigate whether acceptability and feedback were comparable across age groups following pilot testing.

methodsFollowing an initial design phase involving software engineers (n=2) and expert clinicians (n=6), a total of 60 individuals with chronic pain who attended an outpatient clinic at 1 of 2 pain centers in Australia were recruited for pilot testing. The 60 individuals consisted of 20 (33%) adolescents (aged 10-18 years), 20 (33%) young adults (aged 19-35 years), and 20 (33%) adults (aged >35 years) with persistent pain. Participants spent 20 to 30 minutes completing interactive chatbot activities that enabled the Dolores app to gather a pain history and provide education about pain and pain treatments. After the chatbot activities, participants completed a custom-made feedback questionnaire measuring the acceptability constructs pertaining to health education chatbots. To determine the effect of age group on the acceptability ratings and feedback provided, a series of binomial logistic regression models and cumulative odds ordinal logistic regression models with proportional odds were generated.

resultsOverall, acceptability was high for the following constructs: engagement, perceived value, usability, accuracy, responsiveness, adoption intention, esthetics, and overall quality. The effect of age group on all acceptability ratings was small and not statistically significant. An analysis of open-ended question responses revealed that major frustrations with the app were related to Dolores' speech, which was explored further through a comparative analysis. With respect to providing negative feedback about Dolores' speech, a logistic regression model showed that the effect of age group was statistically significant (χ

conclusionsThis study provides support for the acceptability of pain history and education chatbots across different age groups. Chatbot acceptability for adolescent cohorts may be improved by enabling the self-selection of speech characteristics such as rate and personable tone.

Indexed as

acceptabilityadolescenceadolescentagechatbotchronic painconversation agenteducationhealth appmHealthmobile appmobile healthmobile phoneneurophysiologyneurosciencepainpatient educationusabilityyoung adultyouth

Identifiers

PMID37801342
PMCPMC10589833

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.