Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38527272›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2024

The potential and limitations of large language models in identification of the states of motivations for facilitating health behavior change.

Michelle Bak, Jessie Chin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Large language models in biomedicine and health: current research landscape and future directions.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

2 authors.

Michelle BakSchool of Information Sciences, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL 61820, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-5042-5627
Jessie ChinSchool of Information Sciences, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL 61820, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-2878-8544

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importanceThe study highlights the potential and limitations of the Large Language Models (LLMs) in recognizing different states of motivation to provide appropriate information for behavior change. Following the Transtheoretical Model (TTM), we identified the major gap of LLMs in responding to certain states of motivation through validated scenario studies, suggesting future directions of LLMs research for health promotion.

objectivesThe LLMs-based generative conversational agents (GAs) have shown success in identifying user intents semantically. Little is known about its capabilities to identify motivation states and provide appropriate information to facilitate behavior change progression. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe evaluated 3 GAs, ChatGPT, Google Bard, and Llama 2 in identifying motivation states following the TTM stages of change. GAs were evaluated using 25 validated scenarios with 5 health topics across 5 TTM stages. The relevance and completeness of the responses to cover the TTM processes to proceed to the next stage of change were assessed.

results3 GAs identified the motivation states in the preparation stage providing sufficient information to proceed to the action stage. The responses to the motivation states in the action and maintenance stages were good enough covering partial processes for individuals to initiate and maintain their changes in behavior. However, the GAs were not able to identify users' motivation states in the precontemplation and contemplation stages providing irrelevant information, covering about 20%-30% of the processes. DISCUSSION: GAs are able to identify users' motivation states and provide relevant information when individuals have established goals and commitments to take and maintain an action. However, individuals who are hesitant or ambivalent about behavior change are unlikely to receive sufficient and relevant guidance to proceed to the next stage of change.

conclusionThe current GAs effectively identify motivation states of individuals with established goals but may lack support for those ambivalent towards behavior change.

Indexed as

Health BehaviorMotivationHealth PromotionHumansTranstheoretical Modelbehavior changeChatGPTGoogle Bardhealth promotionlarge language modelsLlama 2motivations

Identifiers

PMID38527272
PMCPMC11339501

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.