ArticleScientific reports2026
Validation of the safety, empathy and utility of a large language model conversation agent for parents of autistic and neurodivergent children.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper presents three descriptive validation studies of a large language model (LLM) conversation agent designed to support families and carers with autistic children. In the first study, a LLM’s responses to 400 parent/carer questions were assessed against 10 criteria across 3 domains—safety, empathy and utility by experienced human evaluators. In the second study, the LLM’s capacity to identify safeguarding issues was evaluated. In the third study, the responses to 50 parent/carer questions from the LLM and health clinicians were blind rated by an experienced evaluator and compared. The LLM’s responses were rated as safe, empathetic and useful. The LLM identified and correctly flagged the safeguarding issue in 100% of the presented questions. The ratings for LLM and clinician’s responses were highly correlated and the evaluator was able to distinguish which the provenance of the responses (74%). This is the first deployment of a comprehensive evaluation model that uses human ratings to scrutinize the output of LLM designed to support families with autistic children. It provides a demonstration of how LLMs have the potential to be safe, empathetic and clinically useful tools for responding to the unmet support needs of parents and carers of autistic children.
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.