Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40048637›Full record

Trial reportJMIR human factors2025

Comparison of an AI Chatbot With a Nurse Hotline in Reducing Anxiety and Depression Levels in the General Population: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.

Chen Chen, Kok Tai Lam, Ka Man Yip, Hung Kwan So, Terry Yat Sang Lum, Ian Chi Kei Wong, Jason C Yam, Celine Sze Ling Chui, Patrick Ip

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in JMIR human factors, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Urban mental health: a position paper of the European psychiatric association.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2025
    Review
  18. 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

9 authors.

Chen ChenDepartment of Paediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, School of Clinical Medicine, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, University of Hong Kong, Room 115, 1/F, New Clinical Building, Queen Mary Hospital, 102 Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong SAR, China (Hong Kong), 852 22554090, 852 28551523.ORCID 0000-0002-3119-5010
Kok Tai LamDepartment of Paediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, School of Clinical Medicine, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, University of Hong Kong, Room 115, 1/F, New Clinical Building, Queen Mary Hospital, 102 Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong SAR, China (Hong Kong), 852 22554090, 852 28551523.ORCID 0000-0003-2937-3292
Ka Man YipDepartment of Paediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, School of Clinical Medicine, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, University of Hong Kong, Room 115, 1/F, New Clinical Building, Queen Mary Hospital, 102 Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong SAR, China (Hong Kong), 852 22554090, 852 28551523.ORCID 0000-0002-1577-3431
Hung Kwan SoDepartment of Paediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, School of Clinical Medicine, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, University of Hong Kong, Room 115, 1/F, New Clinical Building, Queen Mary Hospital, 102 Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong SAR, China (Hong Kong), 852 22554090, 852 28551523.ORCID 0000-0002-6188-7587
Terry Yat Sang LumDepartment of Social Work Administration, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China (Hong Kong).ORCID 0000-0003-1196-5345
Ian Chi Kei WongDepartment of Pharmacology and Pharmacy, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China (Hong Kong).ORCID 0000-0001-8242-0014
Jason C YamDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China (Hong Kong).ORCID 0000-0002-2156-1486
Celine Sze Ling ChuiSchool of Nursing, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China (Hong Kong).ORCID 0000-0003-1513-8726
Patrick IpDepartment of Paediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, School of Clinical Medicine, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, University of Hong Kong, Room 115, 1/F, New Clinical Building, Queen Mary Hospital, 102 Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong SAR, China (Hong Kong), 852 22554090, 852 28551523.ORCID 0000-0002-6797-6898

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots have been customized to deliver on-demand support for people with mental health problems. However, the effectiveness of AI chatbots in tackling mental health problems among the general public in Hong Kong remains unclear. Objective: This study aimed to develop a local AI chatbot and compare the effectiveness of the AI chatbot with a conventional nurse hotline in reducing the level of anxiety and depression among individuals in Hong Kong. Methods: This study was a pilot randomized controlled trial conducted from October 2022 to March 2023, involving 124 participants allocated randomly (1:1 ratio) into the AI chatbot and nurse hotline groups. Among these, 62 participants in the AI chatbot group and 41 in the nurse hotline group completed both the pre- and postquestionnaires, including the GAD-7 (Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale-7), PHQ-9 (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), and satisfaction questionnaire. Comparisons were conducted using independent and paired sample t tests (2-tailed) and the χ2 test to analyze changes in anxiety and depression levels. Results: Compared to the mean baseline score of 5.13 (SD 4.623), the mean postdepression score in the chatbot group was 3.68 (SD 4.397), which was significantly lower (P=.008). Similarly, a reduced anxiety score was also observed after the chatbot test (pre vs post: mean 4.74, SD 4.742 vs mean 3.4, SD 3.748; P=.005), respectively. No significant differences were found in the pre-post scores for either depression (P=.38) or anxiety (P=.19). No statistically significant difference was observed in service satisfaction between the two platforms (P=.32). Conclusions: The AI chatbot was comparable to the traditional nurse hotline in alleviating participants' anxiety and depression after responding to inquiries. Moreover, the AI chatbot has shown potential in alleviating short-term anxiety and depression compared to the nurse hotline. While the AI chatbot presents a promising solution for offering accessible strategies to the public, more extensive randomized controlled studies are necessary to further validate its effectiveness.

Indexed as

AnxietyArtificial IntelligenceDepressionHotlinesAdultFemaleGenerative Artificial IntelligenceHong KongHumansMaleMiddle AgedNursesPilot ProjectsAI chatbotanxietyartificial intelligencedepressioneffectiveness

Identifiers

PMID40048637
PMCPMC11906115

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.