Background: College students are increasingly reporting common mental health problems, such as depression and anxiety, and they frequently encounter barriers to seeking traditional mental health treatments. Digital mental health interventions, such as those delivered via the Web and apps, offer the potential to improve access to mental health treatment. Objective: This study aimed to review the literature on digital mental health interventions focused on depression, anxiety, and enhancement of psychological well-being among samples of college students to identify the effectiveness, usability, acceptability, uptake, and adoption of such programs. Methods: We conducted a systematic review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines (registration number CRD42018092800), and the search strategy was conducted by a medical research librarian in the following databases: MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Elsevier), PsycINFO (EbscoHost), the Cochrane Library (Wiley), and Web of Science (Thomson Reuters) from the date of inception to April 2019. Data were synthesized using a systematic narrative synthesis framework, and formal quality assessments were conducted to address the risk of bias. Results: A total of 89 studies met the inclusion criteria. The majority of interventions (71/89, 80%) were delivered via a website, and the most common intervention was internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (28, 31%). Many programs (33, 37%) featured human support in the form of coaching. The majority of programs were either effective (42, 47%) or partially effective (30, 34%) in producing beneficial changes in the main psychological outcome variables. Approximately half of the studies (45, 51%) did not present any usability or acceptability outcomes, and few studies (4, 4%) examined a broad implementation of digital mental health interventions on college campuses. Quality assessments revealed a moderate-to-severe risk of bias in many of the studies. Conclusions: Results suggest that digital mental health interventions can be effective for improving depression, anxiety, and psychological well-being among college students, but more rigorous studies are needed to ascertain the effective elements of these interventions. Continued research on improving the user experience of, and thus user engagement with, these programs appears vital for the sustainable implementation of digital mental health interventions on college campuses.

/pdf/digital-mental-health-interventions-for-depression-anxiety-4huewt627e.pdf

Digital Mental Health Interventions for Depression, Anxiety, and Enhancement of Psychological Well-Being Among College Students: Systematic Review

Background: Conversational agents, also known as chatbots, are computer programs designed to simulate human text or verbal conversations. They are increasingly used in a range of fields, including health care. By enabling better accessibility, personalization, and efficiency, conversational agents have the potential to improve patient care.
Objective: This study aimed to review the current applications, gaps, and challenges in the literature on conversational agents in health care and provide recommendations for their future research, design, and application.
Methods: We performed a scoping review. A broad literature search was performed in MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online; Ovid), EMBASE (Excerpta Medica database; Ovid), PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Central with the search terms “conversational agents,” “conversational AI,” “chatbots,” and associated synonyms. We also searched the gray literature using sources such as the OCLC (Online Computer Library Center) WorldCat database and ResearchGate in April 2019. Reference lists of relevant articles were checked for further articles. Screening and data extraction were performed in parallel by 2 reviewers. The included evidence was analyzed narratively by employing the principles of thematic analysis.
Results: The literature search yielded 47 study reports (45 articles and 2 ongoing clinical trials) that matched the inclusion criteria. The identified conversational agents were largely delivered via smartphone apps (n=23) and used free text only as the main input (n=19) and output (n=30) modality. Case studies describing chatbot development (n=18) were the most prevalent, and only 11 randomized controlled trials were identified. The 3 most commonly reported conversational agent applications in the literature were treatment and monitoring, health care service support, and patient education.
Conclusions: The literature on conversational agents in health care is largely descriptive and aimed at treatment and monitoring and health service support. It mostly reports on text-based, artificial intelligence–driven, and smartphone app–delivered conversational agents. There is an urgent need for a robust evaluation of diverse health care conversational agents’ formats, focusing on their acceptability, safety, and effectiveness.

/pdf/conversational-agents-in-health-care-scoping-review-and-vmy2djyc16.pdf

Conversational Agents in Health Care: Scoping Review and Conceptual Analysis.

Background: Many potential benefits for the uses of chatbots within the context of health care have been theorized, such as improved patient education and treatment compliance. However, little is known about the perspectives of practicing medical physicians on the use of chatbots in health care, even though these individuals are the traditional benchmark of proper patient care. Objective: This study aimed to investigate the perceptions of physicians regarding the use of health care chatbots, including their benefits, challenges, and risks to patients. Methods: A total of 100 practicing physicians across the United States completed a Web-based, self-report survey to examine their opinions of chatbot technology in health care. Descriptive statistics and frequencies were used to examine the characteristics of participants. Results: A wide variety of positive and negative perspectives were reported on the use of health care chatbots, including the importance to patients for managing their own health and the benefits on physical, psychological, and behavioral health outcomes. More consistent agreement occurred with regard to administrative benefits associated with chatbots; many physicians believed that chatbots would be most beneficial for scheduling doctor appointments (78%, 78/100), locating health clinics (76%, 76/100), or providing medication information (71%, 71/100). Conversely, many physicians believed that chatbots cannot effectively care for all of the patients’ needs (76%, 76/100), cannot display human emotion (72%, 72/100), and cannot provide detailed diagnosis and treatment because of not knowing all of the personal factors associated with the patient (71%, 71/100). Many physicians also stated that health care chatbots could be a risk to patients if they self-diagnose too often (714%, 74/100) and do not accurately understand the diagnoses (74%, 74/100). Conclusions: Physicians believed in both costs and benefits associated with chatbots, depending on the logistics and specific roles of the technology. Chatbots may have a beneficial role to play in health care to support, motivate, and coach patients as well as for streamlining organizational tasks; in essence, chatbots could become a surrogate for nonmedical caregivers. However, concerns remain on the inability of chatbots to comprehend the emotional state of humans as well as in areas where expert medical knowledge and intelligence is required.

/pdf/physicians-perceptions-of-chatbots-in-health-care-cross-e29yr6jhvd.pdf

Physicians' Perceptions of Chatbots in Health Care: Cross-Sectional Web-Based Survey

Background: The personalization of conversational agents with natural language user interfaces is seeing increasing use in health care applications, shaping the content, structure, or purpose of the dialogue between humans and conversational agents.
Objective: The goal of this systematic review was to understand the ways in which personalization has been used with conversational agents in health care and characterize the methods of its implementation.
Methods: We searched on PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycInfo, and ACM Digital Library using a predefined search strategy. The studies were included if they: (1) were primary research studies that focused on consumers, caregivers, or health care professionals; (2) involved a conversational agent with an unconstrained natural language interface; (3) tested the system with human subjects; and (4) implemented personalization features.
Results: The search found 1958 publications. After abstract and full-text screening, 13 studies were included in the review. Common examples of personalized content included feedback, daily health reports, alerts, warnings, and recommendations. The personalization features were implemented without a theoretical framework of customization and with limited evaluation of its impact. While conversational agents with personalization features were reported to improve user satisfaction, user engagement and dialogue quality, the role of personalization in improving health outcomes was not assessed directly.
Conclusions: Most of the studies in our review implemented the personalization features without theoretical or evidence-based support for them and did not leverage the recent developments in other domains of personalization. Future research could incorporate personalization as a distinct design factor with a more careful consideration of its impact on health outcomes and its implications on patient safety, privacy, and decision-making.

/pdf/the-personalization-of-conversational-agents-in-health-care-50hne1ywjm.pdf

The Personalization of Conversational Agents in Health Care: Systematic Review.

Background: The high demand for health care services and the growing capability of artificial intelligence have led to the development of conversational agents designed to support a variety of health-related activities, including behavior change, treatment support, health monitoring, training, triage, and screening support. Automation of these tasks could free clinicians to focus on more complex work and increase the accessibility to health care services for the public. An overarching assessment of the acceptability, usability, and effectiveness of these agents in health care is needed to collate the evidence so that future development can target areas for improvement and potential for sustainable adoption.
Objective: This systematic review aims to assess the effectiveness and usability of conversational agents in health care and identify the elements that users like and dislike to inform future research and development of these agents.
Methods: PubMed, Medline (Ovid), EMBASE (Excerpta Medica dataBASE), CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Web of Science, and the Association for Computing Machinery Digital Library were systematically searched for articles published since 2008 that evaluated unconstrained natural language processing conversational agents used in health care. EndNote (version X9, Clarivate Analytics) reference management software was used for initial screening, and full-text screening was conducted by 1 reviewer. Data were extracted, and the risk of bias was assessed by one reviewer and validated by another.
Results: A total of 31 studies were selected and included a variety of conversational agents, including 14 chatbots (2 of which were voice chatbots), 6 embodied conversational agents (3 of which were interactive voice response calls, virtual patients, and speech recognition screening systems), 1 contextual question-answering agent, and 1 voice recognition triage system. Overall, the evidence reported was mostly positive or mixed. Usability and satisfaction performed well (27/30 and 26/31), and positive or mixed effectiveness was found in three-quarters of the studies (23/30). However, there were several limitations of the agents highlighted in specific qualitative feedback.
Conclusions: The studies generally reported positive or mixed evidence for the effectiveness, usability, and satisfactoriness of the conversational agents investigated, but qualitative user perceptions were more mixed. The quality of many of the studies was limited, and improved study design and reporting are necessary to more accurately evaluate the usefulness of the agents in health care and identify key areas for improvement. Further research should also analyze the cost-effectiveness, privacy, and security of the agents.

/pdf/the-effectiveness-of-artificial-intelligence-conversational-2xnihxovyl.pdf

The Effectiveness of Artificial Intelligence Conversational Agents in Health Care: Systematic Review.

Background: Students in need of mental health care face many barriers including cost, location, availability, and stigma Studies show that computer-assisted therapy and 1 conversational chatbot delivering cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) offer a less-intensive and more cost-effective alternative for treating depression and anxiety Although CBT is one of the most effective treatment methods, applying an integrative approach has been linked to equally effective posttreatment improvement Integrative psychological artificial intelligence (AI) offers a scalable solution as the demand for affordable, convenient, lasting, and secure support grows Objective: This study aimed to assess the feasibility and efficacy of using an integrative psychological AI, Tess, to reduce self-identified symptoms of depression and anxiety in college students Methods: In this randomized controlled trial, 75 participants were recruited from 15 universities across the United States All participants completed Web-based surveys, including the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7), and Positive and Negative Affect Scale (PANAS) at baseline and 2 to 4 weeks later (T2) The 2 test groups consisted of 50 participants in total and were randomized to receive unlimited access to Tess for either 2 weeks (n=24) or 4 weeks (n=26) The information-only control group participants (n=24) received an electronic link to the National Institute of Mental Health’s (NIMH) eBook on depression among college students and were only granted access to Tess after completion of the study Results: A sample of 74 participants completed this study with 0% attrition from the test group and less than 1% attrition from the control group (1/24) The average age of participants was 229 years, with 70% of participants being female (52/74), mostly Asian (37/74, 51%), and white (32/74, 41%) Group 1 received unlimited access to Tess, with daily check-ins for 2 weeks Group 2 received unlimited access to Tess with biweekly check-ins for 4 weeks The information-only control group was provided with an electronic link to the NIMH’s eBook Multivariate analysis of covariance was conducted We used an alpha level of 05 for all statistical tests Results revealed a statistically significant difference between the control group and group 1, such that group 1 reported a significant reduction in symptoms of depression as measured by the PHQ-9 (P=03), whereas those in the control group did not A statistically significant difference was found between the control group and both test groups 1 and 2 for symptoms of anxiety as measured by the GAD-7 Group 1 (P=045) and group 2 (P=02) reported a significant reduction in symptoms of anxiety, whereas the control group did not A statistically significant difference was found on the PANAS between the control group and group 1 (P=03) and suggests that Tess did impact scores Conclusions: This study offers evidence that AI can serve as a cost-effective and accessible therapeutic agent Although not designed to appropriate the role of a trained therapist, integrative psychological AI emerges as a feasible option for delivering support Trial Registration: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number: ISRCTN61214172; https://doiorg/101186/ISRCTN61214172

Lysanne Lakerink

Papers

Using Psychological Artificial Intelligence (Tess) to Relieve Symptoms of Depression and Anxiety: Randomized Controlled Trial.