ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2024
The ethical aspects of integrating sentiment and emotion analysis in chatbots for depression intervention.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Metrics Used for the Evaluation of Chatbots Providing Cancer Genetic Risk Assessment and Education: Systematic Review.JMIR AI · 2026Review
- "But it sounded confident": the role of accuracy, tone, and disclaimers in users' medical decision-making.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- Trauma-informed conversational agents for mental health: understanding user perspectives and experiences.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- User experience and safety of generative AI-based mental health chatbots: Scoping review protocol.PloS one · 2026Article
- From needs assessment to usability testing: evaluating the AinoAid™ chatbot for domestic violence support.BMC women's health · 2025Article
- Exploring the Application of AI and Extended Reality Technologies in Metaverse-Driven Mental Health Solutions: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- On the ethical and moral dimensions of using artificial intelligence for evidence synthesis.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Digital health interventions specifically those realized as chatbots are increasingly available for mental health. They include technologies based on artificial intelligence that assess user's sentiment and emotions for the purpose of responding in an empathetic way, or for treatment purposes, e.g. for analyzing the expressed emotions and suggesting interventions. Methods: In this paper, we study the ethical dimensions of integrating these technologies in chatbots for depression intervention using the digital ethics canvas and the DTx Risk Assessment Canvas. Results: As result, we identified some specific risks associated with the integration of sentiment and emotion analysis methods into these systems related to the difficulty to recognize correctly the expressed sentiment or emotion from statements of individuals with depressive symptoms and the appropriate system reaction including risk detection. Depending on the realization of the sentiment or emotion analysis, which might be dictionary-based or machine-learning based, additional risks occur from biased training data or misinterpretations. Discussion: While technology decisions during system development can be made carefully depending on the use case, other ethical risks cannot be prevented on a technical level, but by carefully integrating such chatbots into the care process allowing for supervision by health professionals. We conclude that a careful reflection is needed when integrating sentiment and emotion analysis into chatbots for depression intervention. Balancing risk factors is key to leveraging technology in mental health in a way that enhances, rather than diminishes, user autonomy and agency.
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.