ArticleJMIR formative research2022
Quantitative User Data From a Chatbot Developed for Women With Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Observational Study.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Engagement With Conversational Agent-Enabled Interventions in Cardiometabolic Disease Self-Management: Systematic Review.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2025Pooled it
- Application of Chatbots to Help Patients Self-Manage Diabetes: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Pooled it
- Review
- My diabetes care: an AI-based mobile app with conversational agent for type 2 diabetes self-management.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Generative AI Chatbot for Diabetes Management: Formative 2-Part Qualitative Study Using DTalksBot Involving Patients and Clinicians.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Article
- Interactive Conversational Agents for Perinatal Health: A Mixed Methods Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Evaluating a retrieval-augmented pregnancy chatbot: a comprehensibility-accuracy-readability study of the DIAN AI assistant.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025Article
- Engagement With Conversational Agent-Enabled Interventions in Cardiometabolic Disease Management: Protocol for a Systematic Review.JMIR research protocols · 2024Article
- Evaluation framework for conversational agents with artificial intelligence in health interventions: a systematic scoping review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024Article
- Review
- Can digital health researchers make a difference during the pandemic? Results of the single-arm, chatbot-led Elena+: Care for COVID-19 interventional study.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Article
- A survey of pregnant patients' perspectives on the implementation of artificial intelligence in clinical care.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022Article
- Exploring the characteristics of conversational agents in chronic disease management interventions: A scoping review.Digital healthArticle
- Role of Chatbots on Supporting Women in Perinatal Period: A Scoping Review.Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe rising prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) calls for the use of innovative methods to inform and empower these pregnant women. An information chatbot, Dina, was developed for women with GDM and is Norway's first health chatbot, integrated into the national digital health platform.
objectiveThe aim of this study is to investigate what kind of information users seek in a health chatbot providing support on GDM. Furthermore, we sought to explore when and how the chatbot is used by time of day and the number of questions in each dialogue and to categorize the questions the chatbot was unable to answer (fallback). The overall goal is to explore quantitative user data in the chatbot's log, thereby contributing to further development of the chatbot.
methodsAn observational study was designed. We used quantitative anonymous data (dialogues) from the chatbot's log and platform during an 8-week period in 2018 and a 12-week period in 2019 and 2020. Dialogues between the user and the chatbot were the unit of analysis. Questions from the users were categorized by theme. The time of day the dialogue occurred and the number of questions in each dialogue were registered, and questions resulting in a fallback message were identified. Results are presented using descriptive statistics.
resultsWe identified 610 dialogues with a total of 2838 questions during the 20 weeks of data collection. Questions regarding blood glucose, GDM, diet, and physical activity represented 58.81% (1669/2838) of all questions. In total, 58.0% (354/610) of dialogues occurred during daytime (8 AM to 3:59 PM), Monday through Friday. Most dialogues were short, containing 1-3 questions (340/610, 55.7%), and there was a decrease in dialogues containing 4-6 questions in the second period (P=.013). The chatbot was able to answer 88.51% (2512/2838) of all posed questions. The mean number of dialogues per week was 36 in the first period and 26.83 in the second period.
conclusionsFrequently asked questions seem to mirror the cornerstones of GDM treatment and may indicate that the chatbot is used to quickly access information already provided for them by the health care service but providing a low-threshold way to access that information. Our results underline the need to actively promote and integrate the chatbot into antenatal care as well as the importance of continuous content improvement in order to provide relevant information.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.