SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2026
Evidence and Future Directions for Pediatric Health Care Chatbots: Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 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
Background: Pediatric health care requires distinct considerations, including caregiver involvement and developmental differences in cognition and communication as children gain autonomy, particularly as pediatric health care chatbots gradually emerge. Because childhood and adolescence are formative periods for health behaviors and self-management practices, pediatric chatbots also warrant evaluation against long-term rather than immediate outcomes. Objective: This study aimed to characterize and synthesize the available evidence on pediatric health care chatbots evaluated for health-related outcomes. Furthermore, by identifying gaps in the existing literature, we sought to propose specific considerations for the design, evaluation, and implementation of pediatric health care chatbots. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science were systematically searched without publication year restrictions. Randomized controlled trials, mixed methods, and observational studies that evaluated health care chatbots for children (aged <19 y) or caregivers and assessed health-related outcomes were included. Nonoriginal papers, end-of-life or palliative care studies, and non-English publications were excluded. Study quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool and the Oxford Levels of Evidence 2. Results: A total of 9 studies were included, with 5 (55.6%) involving pediatric participants only, while 4 (44.4%) involved caregivers. Six (66.7%) studies lacked a comparator, and only 3 (33.3%) chatbots were AI-based. Health and psychosocial outcomes were mixed, often showing null findings in objective clinical metrics despite some subjective improvements. Behavioral and cognitive outcomes generally showed favorable changes but relied heavily on subjective evaluations. Although chatbots demonstrated explicit developmental tailoring, with designs shifting from caregiver-mediated approaches in early childhood to autonomous, privacy-focused platforms for adolescents, definitive conclusions regarding their robust associations with health-related outcomes cannot be drawn. This is primarily due to pervasive methodological limitations, including the lack of active comparator groups, reliance on short-term metrics, and significant study heterogeneity. Conclusions: Pediatric health care chatbots are emerging across diverse health care contexts, but the current evidence remains limited and heterogeneous. This review identified developmentally relevant considerations, including caregiver involvement, age-appropriate communication, and developmental differences, that may warrant explicit attention in future chatbot design, evaluation, and implementation.
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.