Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37847539›Full record

ArticleJMIR mental health2023

A Motivational Interviewing Chatbot With Generative Reflections for Increasing Readiness to Quit Smoking: Iterative Development Study.

Andrew Brown, Ash Tanuj Kumar, Osnat Melamed, Imtihan Ahmed, Yu Hao Wang, Arnaud Deza, Marc Morcos, Leon Zhu, Marta Maslej, Nadia Minian and 7 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mental health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  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

17 authors.

Andrew BrownThe Edward S Rogers Sr Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2918-634X
Ash Tanuj KumarThe Edward S Rogers Sr Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-3312-6027
Osnat MelamedINTREPID Lab, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9663-2226
Imtihan AhmedThe Edward S Rogers Sr Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1045-5458
Yu Hao WangThe Edward S Rogers Sr Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-8582-4556
Arnaud DezaThe Edward S Rogers Sr Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-2743-9298
Marc MorcosThe Edward S Rogers Sr Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-3744-9930
Leon ZhuThe Edward S Rogers Sr Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-8326-8719
Marta MaslejKrembil Centre for Neuroinformatics, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6393-5095
Nadia MinianINTREPID Lab, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8179-3628
Vidya SujayaThe Edward S Rogers Sr Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-7079-7624
Jodi WolffINTREPID Lab, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-3853-1631
Olivia DoggettFaculty of Information, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7056-6347
Mathew IantornoFaculty of Information, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6101-2254
Matt RattoFaculty of Information, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3554-4513
Peter SelbyINTREPID Lab, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5401-2996
Jonathan RoseThe Edward S Rogers Sr Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3551-2175

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe motivational interviewing (MI) approach has been shown to help move ambivalent smokers toward the decision to quit smoking. There have been several attempts to broaden access to MI through text-based chatbots. These typically use scripted responses to client statements, but such nonspecific responses have been shown to reduce effectiveness. Recent advances in natural language processing provide a new way to create responses that are specific to a client's statements, using a generative language model.

objectiveThis study aimed to design, evolve, and measure the effectiveness of a chatbot system that can guide ambivalent people who smoke toward the decision to quit smoking with MI-style generative reflections.

methodsOver time, 4 different MI chatbot versions were evolved, and each version was tested with a separate group of ambivalent smokers. A total of 349 smokers were recruited through a web-based recruitment platform. The first chatbot version only asked questions without reflections on the answers. The second version asked the questions and provided reflections with an initial version of the reflection generator. The third version used an improved reflection generator, and the fourth version added extended interaction on some of the questions. Participants' readiness to quit was measured before the conversation and 1 week later using an 11-point scale that measured 3 attributes related to smoking cessation: readiness, confidence, and importance. The number of quit attempts made in the week before the conversation and the week after was surveyed; in addition, participants rated the perceived empathy of the chatbot. The main body of the conversation consists of 5 scripted questions, responses from participants, and (for 3 of the 4 versions) generated reflections. A pretrained transformer-based neural network was fine-tuned on examples of high-quality reflections to generate MI reflections.

resultsThe increase in average confidence using the nongenerative version was 1.0 (SD 2.0; P=.001), whereas for the 3 generative versions, the increases ranged from 1.2 to 1.3 (SD 2.0-2.3; P<.001). The extended conversation with improved generative reflections was the only version associated with a significant increase in average importance (0.7, SD 2.0; P<.001) and readiness (0.4, SD 1.7; P=.01). The enhanced reflection and extended conversations exhibited significantly better perceived empathy than the nongenerative conversation (P=.02 and P=.004, respectively). The number of quit attempts did not significantly change between the week before the conversation and the week after across all 4 conversations.

conclusionsThe results suggest that generative reflections increase the impact of a conversation on readiness to quit smoking 1 week later, although a significant portion of the impact seen so far can be achieved by only asking questions without the reflections. These results support further evolution of the chatbot conversation and can serve as a basis for comparison against more advanced versions.

Indexed as

AIartificial intelligencebehavior changechatbotsconversational agentsdeep learninggenerative artificial intelligencemotivational interviewingnatural language processingsmoking cessationtransformers

Identifiers

PMID37847539
PMCPMC10618902

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.