Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39324852›Full record

ArticleJMIR mental health2024

Generation of Backward-Looking Complex Reflections for a Motivational Interviewing-Based Smoking Cessation Chatbot Using GPT-4: Algorithm Development and Validation.

Ash Tanuj Kumar, Cindy Wang, Alec Dong, Jonathan Rose

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mental health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Autoethnographic Insights from Neurodivergent GAI "Power Users".Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. CHI Conference · 2025
    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

4 authors.

Ash Tanuj KumarFaculty of Applied Science & Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0009-0001-3312-6027
Cindy WangFaculty of Applied Science & Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0009-0005-3798-3981
Alec DongFaculty of Applied Science & Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0009-0009-9883-8939
Jonathan RoseFaculty of Applied Science & Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3551-2175

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Motivational interviewing (MI) is a therapeutic technique that has been successful in helping smokers reduce smoking but has limited accessibility due to the high cost and low availability of clinicians. To address this, the MIBot project has sought to develop a chatbot that emulates an MI session with a client with the specific goal of moving an ambivalent smoker toward the direction of quitting. One key element of an MI conversation is reflective listening, where a therapist expresses their understanding of what the client has said by uttering a reflection that encourages the client to continue their thought process. Complex reflections link the client's responses to relevant ideas and facts to enhance this contemplation. Backward-looking complex reflections (BLCRs) link the client's most recent response to a relevant selection of the client's previous statements. Our current chatbot can generate complex reflections-but not BLCRs-using large language models (LLMs) such as GPT-2, which allows the generation of unique, human-like messages customized to client responses. Recent advancements in these models, such as the introduction of GPT-4, provide a novel way to generate complex text by feeding the models instructions and conversational history directly, making this a promising approach to generate BLCRs. Objective: This study aims to develop a method to generate BLCRs for an MI-based smoking cessation chatbot and to measure the method's effectiveness. Methods: LLMs such as GPT-4 can be stimulated to produce specific types of responses to their inputs by "asking" them with an English-based description of the desired output. These descriptions are called prompts, and the goal of writing a description that causes an LLM to generate the required output is termed prompt engineering. We evolved an instruction to prompt GPT-4 to generate a BLCR, given the portions of the transcript of the conversation up to the point where the reflection was needed. The approach was tested on 50 previously collected MIBot transcripts of conversations with smokers and was used to generate a total of 150 reflections. The quality of the reflections was rated on a 4-point scale by 3 independent raters to determine whether they met specific criteria for acceptability. Results: Of the 150 generated reflections, 132 (88%) met the level of acceptability. The remaining 18 (12%) had one or more flaws that made them inappropriate as BLCRs. The 3 raters had pairwise agreement on 80% to 88% of these scores. Conclusions: The method presented to generate BLCRs is good enough to be used as one source of reflections in an MI-style conversation but would need an automatic checker to eliminate the unacceptable ones. This work illustrates the power of the new LLMs to generate therapeutic client-specific responses under the command of a language-based specification.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsMotivational InterviewingSmoking CessationAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle Agedautomated therapycessationchatbotChatGPTdialogue agenteffectivenessGPT-4large language modelsmessagesmotivational interviewingnatural language processingreflection generationreflectionssmokersmokerssmokingsmoking cessationtherapy

Identifiers

PMID39324852
PMCPMC11448290

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.