Virtual Assistants' Response to Queries About Nicotine Replacement Therapy: A Mixed-Method Analysis.

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Evaluation & the Health Professions Pub Date : 2024-02-26 DOI:10.1177/01632787241235689
Samia Amin, Kylie Uyeda, Ian Pagano, Kayzel R Tabangcura, Rachel Taketa, Crissy Terawaki Kawamoto, Pallav Pokhrel
{"title":"Virtual Assistants' Response to Queries About Nicotine Replacement Therapy: A Mixed-Method Analysis.","authors":"Samia Amin, Kylie Uyeda, Ian Pagano, Kayzel R Tabangcura, Rachel Taketa, Crissy Terawaki Kawamoto, Pallav Pokhrel","doi":"10.1177/01632787241235689","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study focused on investigating the potential of Artificial Intelligent-powered Virtual Assistants (VAs) such as Amazon Alexa, Apple Siri, and Google Assistant as tools to help individuals seeking information about Nicotine Replacement Treatment (NRT) for smoking cessation. The researchers asked 40 NRT-related questions to each of the 3 VAs and evaluated the responses for voice recognition. The study used a cross-sectional mixed-method design with a total sample size of 360 responses. Inter-rater reliability and differences between VAs' responses were examined by SAS software, and qualitative assessments were conducted using NVivo software. Google Assistant achieved 100% voice recognition for NRT-related questions, followed by Apple Siri at 97.5%, and Amazon Alexa at 83.3%. Statistically significant differences were found between the responses of Amazon Alexa relative to both Google Assistant and Apple Siri. Researcher 1's ratings significantly differed from Researcher 2's (<i>p</i> = .001), but not from Researcher 3's (<i>p</i> = .11). Virtual Assistants occasionally struggled to understand the context or nuances of questions, lacked in-depth information in their responses, and provided generic or unrelated responses. Virtual Assistants have the potential to be incorporated into smoking cessation interventions and tobacco control initiatives, contingent upon improving their competencies.</p>","PeriodicalId":12315,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation & the Health Professions","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11345875/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evaluation & the Health Professions","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01632787241235689","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study focused on investigating the potential of Artificial Intelligent-powered Virtual Assistants (VAs) such as Amazon Alexa, Apple Siri, and Google Assistant as tools to help individuals seeking information about Nicotine Replacement Treatment (NRT) for smoking cessation. The researchers asked 40 NRT-related questions to each of the 3 VAs and evaluated the responses for voice recognition. The study used a cross-sectional mixed-method design with a total sample size of 360 responses. Inter-rater reliability and differences between VAs' responses were examined by SAS software, and qualitative assessments were conducted using NVivo software. Google Assistant achieved 100% voice recognition for NRT-related questions, followed by Apple Siri at 97.5%, and Amazon Alexa at 83.3%. Statistically significant differences were found between the responses of Amazon Alexa relative to both Google Assistant and Apple Siri. Researcher 1's ratings significantly differed from Researcher 2's (p = .001), but not from Researcher 3's (p = .11). Virtual Assistants occasionally struggled to understand the context or nuances of questions, lacked in-depth information in their responses, and provided generic or unrelated responses. Virtual Assistants have the potential to be incorporated into smoking cessation interventions and tobacco control initiatives, contingent upon improving their competencies.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
虚拟助手对尼古丁替代疗法询问的回应:混合方法分析。
这项研究的重点是调查亚马逊 Alexa、苹果 Siri 和谷歌助手等人工智能驱动的虚拟助理(VA)作为帮助个人寻求戒烟尼古丁替代疗法(NRT)相关信息的工具的潜力。研究人员分别向这 3 种 VA 提出了 40 个与尼古丁替代疗法相关的问题,并对回答进行了语音识别评估。该研究采用了横断面混合方法设计,总样本量为 360 个回答。研究人员使用 SAS 软件检查了评价者之间的可靠性和自愿者回答之间的差异,并使用 NVivo 软件进行了定性评估。谷歌助手对 NRT 相关问题的语音识别率达到 100%,其次是苹果 Siri(97.5%)和亚马逊 Alexa(83.3%)。与谷歌助手和 Apple Siri 相比,亚马逊 Alexa 的回答在统计学上存在明显差异。研究人员 1 的评分与研究人员 2 的评分有显著差异(p = .001),但与研究人员 3 的评分没有显著差异(p = .11)。虚拟助理有时难以理解问题的上下文或细微差别,在回答中缺乏深入的信息,并提供通用或不相关的回答。虚拟助理有可能被纳入戒烟干预和烟草控制计划,但这取决于他们能力的提高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Evaluation & the Health Professions is a peer-reviewed, quarterly journal that provides health-related professionals with state-of-the-art methodological, measurement, and statistical tools for conceptualizing the etiology of health promotion and problems, and developing, implementing, and evaluating health programs, teaching and training services, and products that pertain to a myriad of health dimensions. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Average time from submission to first decision: 31 days
期刊最新文献
The Use of Contribution Analysis in Evaluating Health Interventions: A Scoping Review. Impact of Multi-point Nursing Strategies Under a Clinical Problem-Solving Framework on Adverse Events Associated With Thyroid Nodule Resection. Real Patient Participation in Workplace-Based Assessment of Health Professional Trainees: A Scoping Review. The Validity and Reliability of the Turkish Version of Self-Perceived Barriers for Physical Activity Questionnaire. Factors Associated With Agreement Between Parent and Childhood Cancer Survivor Reports on Child's Health Related Quality of Life.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1