ArticleDigital health
Safety-focused development and evaluation of an LLM sexual well-being chatbot for women: A methods-focused feasibility study.
Article in Digital health. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Large language models (LLMs) offer opportunities for sexual health education, but integrating them into digital products presents clinical challenges and risks, particularly regarding clinical safety and monitoring at scale. This study designed and evaluated a safety-focused framework for an LLM-based sexual well-being chatbot in a mobile application. Methods: We conducted a methods-focused feasibility study comprising a multi-stage development and evaluation of the chatbot. We used an interdisciplinary, medically led three-phase development process, including a five-stage evaluation framework combining synthetic test cases, clinician-led vulnerability testing and controlled release to real users to assess clinical accuracy and safety. Results: The chatbot met predefined precision and recall thresholds in synthetic testing. Clinically inaccurate responses remained below 2% across clinician review stages, with no high-severity unsafe responses. In a controlled release, 5195 real user interactions were reviewed. Clinically inaccurate responses occurred in 0.90% (47/5195) of dialogues, with unsafe responses within severity thresholds. Conclusion: This study demonstrates the feasibility of a structured framework for developing and evaluating LLM-based sexual health chatbots with clinical safety oversight. This approach helps to address gaps in safety reporting and could be adapted for other sensitive clinical domains.
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.