SynthesisSystematic reviews2025
Conversational agent-based interventions for lifestyle behavior modification in older adults: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe global rise in population aging and the increasing burden of non-communicable diseases demand scalable, cost-effective strategies to support healthy aging. Conversational agent-based interventions, which deliver personalized guidance through interactive dialogue, offer a promising yet underexplored approach to promoting lifestyle behavior change among older adults. Thus, the purpose of this study is to systematically review the characteristics, acceptability, and effectiveness of conversational agent-based interventions for lifestyle behavior modification in older adults, and to identify key design and research considerations for advancing this emerging field.
methodsA comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL databases was conducted from inception to February 28, 2025. Studies evaluating behavior-related outcomes of conversational agent-based interventions targeting lifestyle modifications in older adults were included. Methodological quality was appraised using the Quality Assessment Tool for Studies with Diverse Designs (QATSDD).
resultsSix studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising four randomized controlled trials, one quasi-experimental study, and one observational cohort study. Most conversational agents were frame-based, computer-delivered, and embodied, featuring button-based text inputs and integrating theory-driven relational and persuasive strategies. Although evidence suggested that these interventions were largely feasible and acceptable to older adults, their efficacy in promoting physical activity, diet, and other health outcomes remains inconclusive, likely due to limited evidence, varied designs, and inconsistent outcome measures and statistical methods.
conclusionsThis review identified key features of conversational agents designed to promote lifestyle behavior change among older adults and highlighted existing design limitations that may undermine user engagement and effective adoption of these technologies. To fully realize and leverage the potential of conversational agents in supporting healthy aging, it is crucial to focus on user-friendly designs, detailed reporting of the underlying theories and design processes, and thorough evaluations of relevant health outcomes. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD420251039283.
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.