Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41058972›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in digital health2025

Exploring health professionals' views on the depiction of conversational agents as health professionals: a qualitative descriptive study.

A Luke MacNeill, Lillian MacNeill, Alison Luke, Shelley Doucet

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

A Luke MacNeillCentre for Research in Integrated Care, University of New Brunswick, Saint John, NB, Canada.
Lillian MacNeillCentre for Research in Integrated Care, University of New Brunswick, Saint John, NB, Canada.
Alison LukeCentre for Research in Integrated Care, University of New Brunswick, Saint John, NB, Canada.
Shelley DoucetCentre for Research in Integrated Care, University of New Brunswick, Saint John, NB, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Some health care conversational agents (HCCAs) are designed to simulate health professionals in terms of their presentation or appearance. Research suggests that the public has favorable views toward the depiction of HCCAs as health professionals, but the views of health professionals are less clear. We conducted a qualitative descriptive study to learn more about health professionals' views on this topic. Methods: Physicians, nurses, and regulated mental health professionals were recruited using web-based methods. Participants were interviewed individually using the Zoom videoconferencing platform. They were asked to discuss potential benefits and drawbacks surrounding the depiction of HCCAs as health professionals. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and uploaded to NVivo (version 12; QSR International, Inc) for thematic analysis. Results: Twenty-four health professionals participated in the study (19 women, five men; Conclusions: The health professionals in this study expressed mixed views toward the depiction of HCCAs as health professionals. Their insights may prompt further discussion on the appropriate depiction of HCCAs among developers and other stakeholders.

Indexed as

chatbotsconversational agentshealth carehealth professionalsinterviewqualitativeviews

Identifiers

PMID41058972
PMCPMC12497840

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.