Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40513000›Full record

SynthesisJMIR human factors2025

User and Provider Experiences With Health Education Chatbots: Qualitative Systematic Review.

Кyung-Eun Anna Choi, Sebastian Fitzek

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

2 authors.

Кyung-Eun Anna Choi *Health Services Research Group, Medical Images Analysis and Artificial Intelligence, Danube Private University, Steiner Landstraße 124, Krems an der Donau, 3500, Austria, 43 0734102289.ORCID 0000-0001-6694-8206
Sebastian Fitzek *Health Services Research Group, Medical Images Analysis and Artificial Intelligence, Danube Private University, Steiner Landstraße 124, Krems an der Donau, 3500, Austria, 43 0734102289.ORCID 0000-0001-6454-7820

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Chatbots, as dialog-based platforms, have the potential to transform health education and behavior-change interventions. Despite the growing use of chatbots, qualitative insights into user and provider experiences remain underexplored, particularly with respect to experiences and perceptions, adoption factors, and the role of theoretical frameworks in design. Objective: This systematic review of qualitative evidence aims to address three key research questions (RQs): (RQ1) user and provider experiences; (RQ2) facilitators and barriers to adoption; and (RQ3) role of theoretical frameworks. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and ScienceDirect from January 1, 2018, to October 1, 2023, for English- or German-language, peer-reviewed qualitative or mixed methods studies. Studies were included if they examined users' or providers' experiences with chatbots in health education or behavior-change contexts. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts (Cohen κ=0.82). We used the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for quality assessment and conducted a reflexive thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke's framework. Results: Among the 1754 records identified, 27 studies from 10 countries met the inclusion criteria, encompassing 241 qualitative-only participants and 10,802 mixed method participants (657 contributing qualitative data). For RQ1, users emphasized empathy and emotional connection. For RQ2, accessibility and ease of use emerged as facilitators, whereas trust deficits, technical glitches, and cultural misalignment were key barriers. For RQ3, the integration of behavior-change theories emerged as underutilized despite their potential to increase motivation. Conclusions: Chatbots demonstrate strong potential for health education and behavior-change interventions but must address privacy and trust issues, embed robust theoretical underpinnings, and overcome adoption barriers to fully realize their impact. Future directions should include evaluations of cultural adaptability and rigorous ethical considerations in chatbot design.

Indexed as

Health EducationHealth PersonnelGenerative Artificial IntelligenceHumansQualitative Researchbehavior changechatbothealth educationpersonalizationprivacy concernsqualitative research.user experience

Identifiers

PMID40513000
PMCPMC12180679

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.