Effectiveness of chatbots in increasing uptake, intention, and attitudes related to any type of vaccination: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 3.8 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED Applied psychology. Health and well-being Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-17 DOI:10.1111/aphw.12564
Paul Shing-Fong Chan, Yuan Fang, Doug H Cheung, Qingpeng Zhang, Fenghua Sun, Phoenix K H Mo, Zixin Wang
{"title":"Effectiveness of chatbots in increasing uptake, intention, and attitudes related to any type of vaccination: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Paul Shing-Fong Chan, Yuan Fang, Doug H Cheung, Qingpeng Zhang, Fenghua Sun, Phoenix K H Mo, Zixin Wang","doi":"10.1111/aphw.12564","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This systematic review and meta-analysis analyzed and summarized the growing literature on the effectiveness of chatbot-delivered interventions in increasing uptake, intention, and attitudes related to any type of vaccination. We identified randomized controlled studies (RCTs), quasi-experimental studies, and non-experimental studies from the following platforms: PubMed, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Global Health, APA PsycInfo, and EMBASE databases. A total of 12 eligible studies published from 2019 to 2023 were analyzed and summarized. In particular, one RCT showed that a chatbot-delivered tailored intervention was more effective than a chatbot-delivered non-tailored intervention in promoting seasonal influenza vaccine uptake among older adults (50.5% versus 35.3%, p = 0.002). Six RCTs were included in the meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of chatbot interventions to improve vaccination attitudes and intentions. The pooled standard mean difference (SMD) of overall attitude change was 0.34 (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.13, 0.55, p = 0.001). We found a non-significant trivial effect of chatbot interventions on improving intentions of vaccination (SMD: 0.11, 95% CI: -0.13, 0.34, p = 0.38). However, further evidence is needed to draw a more precise conclusion. Additionally, study participants reported high satisfaction levels of using the chatbot and were likely to recommend it to others. The development of chatbots is still nascent and rooms for improvement exist.</p>","PeriodicalId":8127,"journal":{"name":"Applied psychology. Health and well-being","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied psychology. Health and well-being","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aphw.12564","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This systematic review and meta-analysis analyzed and summarized the growing literature on the effectiveness of chatbot-delivered interventions in increasing uptake, intention, and attitudes related to any type of vaccination. We identified randomized controlled studies (RCTs), quasi-experimental studies, and non-experimental studies from the following platforms: PubMed, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Global Health, APA PsycInfo, and EMBASE databases. A total of 12 eligible studies published from 2019 to 2023 were analyzed and summarized. In particular, one RCT showed that a chatbot-delivered tailored intervention was more effective than a chatbot-delivered non-tailored intervention in promoting seasonal influenza vaccine uptake among older adults (50.5% versus 35.3%, p = 0.002). Six RCTs were included in the meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of chatbot interventions to improve vaccination attitudes and intentions. The pooled standard mean difference (SMD) of overall attitude change was 0.34 (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.13, 0.55, p = 0.001). We found a non-significant trivial effect of chatbot interventions on improving intentions of vaccination (SMD: 0.11, 95% CI: -0.13, 0.34, p = 0.38). However, further evidence is needed to draw a more precise conclusion. Additionally, study participants reported high satisfaction levels of using the chatbot and were likely to recommend it to others. The development of chatbots is still nascent and rooms for improvement exist.

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
聊天机器人在提高与任何类型疫苗接种相关的接种率、意向和态度方面的有效性:系统回顾与荟萃分析。
本系统综述和荟萃分析分析并总结了越来越多的文献,这些文献涉及聊天机器人提供的干预措施在提高与任何类型疫苗接种相关的接种率、意向和态度方面的有效性。我们从以下平台确定了随机对照研究(RCT)、准实验研究和非实验研究:PubMed、Web of Science、MEDLINE、Global Health、APA PsycInfo 和 EMBASE 数据库。共对 2019 年至 2023 年间发表的 12 项符合条件的研究进行了分析和总结。其中,一项研究表明,在促进老年人接种季节性流感疫苗方面,聊天机器人提供的定制干预比聊天机器人提供的非定制干预更有效(50.5% 对 35.3%,p = 0.002)。荟萃分析纳入了六项研究实验,以评估聊天机器人干预对改善疫苗接种态度和意愿的有效性。总体态度变化的汇总标准平均差 (SMD) 为 0.34(95% 置信区间 [CI]:0.13, 0.55,p = 0.001)。我们发现聊天机器人干预对改善疫苗接种意向有非显著的微小影响(SMD:0.11,95% 置信区间[CI]:-0.13,0.34,p = 0.38)。然而,要得出更准确的结论,还需要进一步的证据。此外,研究参与者对使用聊天机器人的满意度很高,并有可能将其推荐给其他人。聊天机器人的发展仍处于初级阶段,仍有改进的余地。
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
12.10
自引率
2.90%
发文量
95
期刊介绍: Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being is a triannual peer-reviewed academic journal published by Wiley-Blackwell on behalf of the International Association of Applied Psychology. It was established in 2009 and covers applied psychology topics such as clinical psychology, counseling, cross-cultural psychology, and environmental psychology.
期刊最新文献
Daily relationship satisfaction and markers of health: Findings from a smartphone-based assessment. Evaluation of a meaning in life intervention applied to work: A randomized clinical trial. Applying machine learning to understand the role of social-emotional skills on subjective well-being and physical health. Subjective well-being of children with special educational needs: Longitudinal predictors using machine learning. Increasing student well-being through a positive psychology intervention: changes in salivary cortisol, depression, psychological well-being, and hope.
×
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