ArticleBMJ open2025
Role of artificial intelligence-powered conversational agents (chatbots) in musculoskeletal disorders: a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMusculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) represent a significant global health burden that leads to substantial disability with socioeconomic impact. With the rise of artificial intelligence (AI), particularly large language model-driven conversational agents (chatbots), there is potential to enhance the management of MSDs. However, the application of AI-powered chatbots in this population has not been comprehensively synthesised. Therefore, this scoping review aims to explore the current and potential use of AI-powered chatbots in managing MSDs. The review will map out the targeted diseases, the purposes of chatbot interventions, the clinical tools or frameworks used in training these systems and the evaluated outcomes in clinical settings. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines, with a comprehensive search across multiple databases, including Medline (Ovid Medline), Embase (Ovid), ISI Web of Science (Clarivate) and ClinicalTrials.gov. We will include studies involving adults with MSDs, regardless of publication status, language or year. The scoping review will exclude studies using non-AI chatbots or human health coaches. Data extraction and synthesis will focus on demographic characteristics, chatbot methods, outcomes and thematic analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Formal ethical approval is not required as this study involves neither human participants nor unpublished secondary data. The findings of this scoping review will be disseminated through professional networks, conference presentations and publication in a scientific journal.
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.