Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40306635›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2025

Effectiveness of Topic-Based Chatbots on Mental Health Self-Care and Mental Well-Being: Randomized Controlled Trial.

Alan C Y Tong, Kent T Y Wong, Wing W T Chung, Winnie W S Mak

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05694507 (Evaluation of Chatbot for Mental Well-being), which is not on this map. Cited by 15 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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.

NCT05694507 nacompletednot on this map

Evaluation of Chatbot for Mental Well-being: A Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorChinese University of Hong KongRan2023 to 2023Enrolled293ConditionsMental Well-being, Mental Health LiteracyArmsMental Well-being Chatbot
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Digital Psychiatry with Chatbot: Recent Advances and Limitations.Clinical psychopharmacology and neuroscience : the official scientific journal of the Korean College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2025
    Review
  15. Review
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.

Alan C Y TongDepartment of Psychology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China (Hong Kong).ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3158-0939
Kent T Y WongDepartment of Psychology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China (Hong Kong).ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2263-7999
Wing W T ChungDepartment of Psychology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China (Hong Kong).ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0109-6265
Winnie W S MakDepartment of Psychology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China (Hong Kong).ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9714-7847

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe global surge in mental health challenges has placed unprecedented strain on health care systems, highlighting the need for scalable interventions to promote mental health self-care. Chatbots have emerged as promising tools by providing accessible, evidence-based support. While chatbots have shown promise in delivering mental health interventions, most studies have only focused on clinical populations and symptom reduction, leaving a critical gap in understanding their preventive potential for self-care and mental health literacy in the general population.

objectiveThis study evaluated the effectiveness of a rule-based, topic-specific chatbot intervention in improving self-care efficacy, mental health literacy, self-care intention, self-care behaviors, and mental well-being immediately after 10 days and 1 month of its use.

methodsA 2-arm, assessor-blinded randomized controlled trial was conducted. A total of 285 participants were randomly assigned to the chatbot intervention group (n=140) and a waitlist control group (n=145). The chatbot intervention consisted of 10 topic-specific sessions targeting stress management, emotion regulation, and value clarification, delivered over 10 days with a 7-day free-access period. Primary outcomes included self-care self-efficacy, behavioral intentions, self-care behaviors, and mental health literacy. Secondary outcomes included depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, and mental well-being. Assessments were self-administered on the web at baseline, 10 days after the intervention, and at a 1-month follow-up. All outcomes were analyzed using linear mixed models with an intention-to-treat approach, and effect sizes were calculated using Cohen d.

resultsParticipants in the chatbot group demonstrated significantly greater improvements in behavioral intentions (F

conclusionsThis study highlights the potential of rule-based chatbots in promoting mental health literacy and fostering short-term self-care intentions. However, the lack of sustained effects points to the necessary improvements required in chatbot design, including greater personalization and interactive features to enhance self-efficacy and long-term mental health outcomes. Future research should explore hybrid approaches that combine rule-based and generative artificial intelligence systems to optimize intervention effectiveness.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT05694507; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05694507.

Indexed as

Mental HealthSelf CareAdultFemaleGenerative Artificial IntelligenceHealth LiteracyHumansMaleMiddle Agedartificial intelligencechatbot interventiondigital healthmental health literacymental well-beingrandomized controlled trialself-care

Identifiers

PMID40306635
PMCPMC12079066

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.