Abstract
Background Artificial-Intelligence (AI)-based chatbots can offer personalized, engaging, and on-demand health-promotion interventions. This systematic review evaluates the feasibility, efficacy, and intervention characteristics of AI-chatbots in promoting health-behavior change.
Methods A comprehensive search was conducted in seven bibliographic databases (PubMed, IEEE Xplore, ACM Digital Library, PsychoINFO, Web of Science, EMBASE, and JMIR publications) for empirical articles published from 1980 to 2022 that evaluated feasibility and/or efficacy of AI-chatbots for behavioral change. The screening, extraction, and analyses of identified articles followed the PRISMA guidelines.
Results Of the 15 included studies, majority studies (n=11) reported high usability, acceptability and engagement, and some evidence on feasibility of AI-chatbots. Selected studies demonstrated high efficacy in promoting healthy lifestyles (n=6), smoking cessation (n=4), treatment/medication adherence (n=2), and reduction in substance misuse (n=1). Behavioral change theories and/or expert consultation were used to develop behavioral change strategies of AI-chatbots, including goal setting, monitoring, real-time reinforcement/feedback, and on- demand support. Real-time user-chatbot interaction data, such as user preferences and behavioral performance, were collected on the chatbot platform to identify ways of providing personalized services. The AI-chatbots demonstrated potential for scalability by deployment through accessible devices and platforms (e.g., smartphones and messenger). Participants also reported that AI-chatbots offered a non-judgmental space for communicating sensitive information. However, the reported results need to be interpreted with caution because of moderate to high risk of internal validity, insufficient description of AI-techniques, and limitation for generalizability.
Conclusion AI-chatbots have demonstrated efficacy of health-behavior change interventions among large and diverse population; however, future studies need to adopt robust RCTs to establish definitive conclusions.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Disease under Award #R01AI127203-5S1. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. The authors would also like to acknowledge the generous funding support from the University of South Carolina (USC) Big Data Health Science Center, a USC excellence initiative program [Grant No: BDHSC-2021-14] and [Grant No: BDHSC-2021-11].
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript
