ReviewJMIR medical informatics2024
Transforming Health Care Through Chatbots for Medical History-Taking and Future Directions: Comprehensive Systematic Review.
Review in JMIR medical informatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 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
33 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Robot-Assisted Oral Examination: Challenges and Innovations.International dental journal · 2026Pooled it
- Leveraging chatbots for enhanced decision-making: a comprehensive literature review.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Pooled it
- Comparing AI chatbot simulation and peer role-play for OSCE preparation: a pilot randomized controlled trial.BMC medical education · 2025Trial
- Conversational AI in Hereditary Cancer Care: Sociotechnical Study of Responsible Design Requirements.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Prompt Design and Internal Reasoning in Chatbot-Based Medical History Taking: Simulation Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Shaping the Future of Men's Health: How AI Could Be a Transformative Tool for Better Patient Outcomes and Provider Efficiency.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Digital Dermatology.Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft = Journal of the German Society of Dermatology : JDDG · 2026Review
- Explainable and Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence in Cardiology: A Narrative Review of Clinical Applications, Operational Integration, and Future Directions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Transforming Urological Care With Artificial Intelligence Chatbots: From Digital Assistants to Clinical Partners.International neurourology journal · 2026Review
- Can Medical Chatbots Trigger Disinhibition and Encourage Health Information Disclosure?Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence For 6P Medicine: Consolidating AI Needs of Predictive, Preventive, Personalized, Participatory, Precision, and Public Health Trajectories.Journal of medical systems · 2026Review
- AI-assisted PEG aftercare education for older adults: clinician-informed chatbot design (PEGAssist).European geriatric medicine · 2026Article
- Acceptance of Medical History-Taking Supported by Artificial Intelligence and Chatbots: A Population-Based Survey in Germany.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Safety-First Framework for AI-Enabled Anamnesis in Head and Neck Surgery: Evidence Synthesis from a Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Recent Advances in AI and GenAI for Health Informatics.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Review of Artificial Intelligence for Clinical Use in Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias.Seminars in neurology · 2026Review
- Comparative Performance of agentic AI and Physicians in Taking Clinical History across Leading Large Language Models (LLMs).medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Facilitators and Barriers of Using an Artificial Intelligence Agent in Chronic Disease Management: A Normalization Process Theory-Guided Qualitative Study of Older Patients with COPD.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A Review of Recent Developments in Artificial Intelligence and Big Data Technologies for Ophthalmology Referrals and Clinical Practice.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026Review
- Communication features of ChatGPT responses and care-seeking intention for syphilis in Japan: a controlled dialogue experiment.Journal of rural medicine : JRM · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe integration of artificial intelligence and chatbot technology in health care has attracted significant attention due to its potential to improve patient care and streamline history-taking. As artificial intelligence-driven conversational agents, chatbots offer the opportunity to revolutionize history-taking, necessitating a comprehensive examination of their impact on medical practice.
objectiveThis systematic review aims to assess the role, effectiveness, usability, and patient acceptance of chatbots in medical history-taking. It also examines potential challenges and future opportunities for integration into clinical practice.
methodsA systematic search included PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE (via Ovid), CENTRAL, Scopus, and Open Science and covered studies through July 2024. The inclusion and exclusion criteria for the studies reviewed were based on the PICOS (participants, interventions, comparators, outcomes, and study design) framework. The population included individuals using health care chatbots for medical history-taking. Interventions focused on chatbots designed to facilitate medical history-taking. The outcomes of interest were the feasibility, acceptance, and usability of chatbot-based medical history-taking. Studies not reporting on these outcomes were excluded. All study designs except conference papers were eligible for inclusion. Only English-language studies were considered. There were no specific restrictions on study duration. Key search terms included "chatbot*," "conversational agent*," "virtual assistant," "artificial intelligence chatbot," "medical history," and "history-taking." The quality of observational studies was classified using the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) criteria (eg, sample size, design, data collection, and follow-up). The RoB 2 (Risk of Bias) tool assessed areas and the levels of bias in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
resultsThe review included 15 observational studies and 3 RCTs and synthesized evidence from different medical fields and populations. Chatbots systematically collect information through targeted queries and data retrieval, improving patient engagement and satisfaction. The results show that chatbots have great potential for history-taking and that the efficiency and accessibility of the health care system can be improved by 24/7 automated data collection. Bias assessments revealed that of the 15 observational studies, 5 (33%) studies were of high quality, 5 (33%) studies were of moderate quality, and 5 (33%) studies were of low quality. Of the RCTs, 2 had a low risk of bias, while 1 had a high risk.
conclusionsThis systematic review provides critical insights into the potential benefits and challenges of using chatbots for medical history-taking. The included studies showed that chatbots can increase patient engagement, streamline data collection, and improve health care decision-making. For effective integration into clinical practice, it is crucial to design user-friendly interfaces, ensure robust data security, and maintain empathetic patient-physician interactions. Future research should focus on refining chatbot algorithms, improving their emotional intelligence, and extending their application to different health care settings to realize their full potential in modern medicine.
trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42023410312; www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero.
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.