1859Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Can J Psychiatry. 2021 Apr;66(4):339-348. doi: 10.1177/0706743720966429. Epub 2020 Oct 16.
The need for digital tools in mental health is clear, with insufficient access to mental health services. Conversational agents, also known as chatbots or voice assistants, are digital tools capable of holding natural language conversations. Since our last review in 2018, many new conversational agents and research have emerged, and we aimed to reassess the conversational agent landscape in this updated systematic review.
A systematic literature search was conducted in January 2020 using the PubMed, Embase, PsychINFO, and Cochrane databases. Studies included were those that involved a conversational agent assessing serious mental illness: major depressive disorder, schizophrenia spectrum disorders, bipolar disorder, or anxiety disorder.
Of the 247 references identified from selected databases, 7 studies met inclusion criteria. Overall, there were generally positive experiences with conversational agents in regard to diagnostic quality, therapeutic efficacy, or acceptability. There continues to be, however, a lack of standard measures that allow ease of comparison of studies in this space. There were several populations that lacked representation such as the pediatric population and those with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. While comparing 2018 to 2020 research offers useful insight into changes and growth, the high degree of heterogeneity between all studies in this space makes direct comparison challenging.
This review revealed few but generally positive outcomes regarding conversational agents' diagnostic quality, therapeutic efficacy, and acceptability, which may augment mental health care. Despite this increase in research activity, there continues to be a lack of standard measures for evaluating conversational agents as well as several neglected populations. We recommend that the standardization of conversational agent studies should include patient adherence and engagement, therapeutic efficacy, and clinician perspectives.
心理健康对数字工具的需求显而易见,但心理健康服务的获取不足。会话代理,也称为聊天机器人或语音助手,是能够进行自然语言对话的数字工具。自 2018 年我们上次审查以来,许多新的会话代理和研究已经出现,我们旨在通过本次更新的系统评价重新评估会话代理领域。
2020 年 1 月,我们使用 PubMed、Embase、PsychINFO 和 Cochrane 数据库进行了系统文献检索。研究包括涉及会话代理评估严重精神疾病的研究:重度抑郁症、精神分裂症谱系障碍、双相情感障碍或焦虑症。
从选定的数据库中确定了 247 篇参考文献,其中 7 项研究符合纳入标准。总体而言,在诊断质量、治疗效果或可接受性方面,人们对会话代理的体验通常是积极的。然而,仍然缺乏允许轻松比较该领域研究的标准措施。有些人群缺乏代表性,例如儿科人群以及患有精神分裂症或双相情感障碍的人群。虽然将 2018 年与 2020 年的研究进行比较提供了对此类变化和发展的有用见解,但该领域所有研究之间存在高度异质性,使得直接比较具有挑战性。
本综述揭示了一些关于会话代理的诊断质量、治疗效果和可接受性的积极结果,但可能会增强心理健康护理。尽管研究活动有所增加,但仍然缺乏评估会话代理的标准措施,以及一些被忽视的人群。我们建议,会话代理研究的标准化应包括患者依从性和参与度、治疗效果和临床医生的观点。