Managing emotional dialogue for a virtual cancer patient: a schema-guided approach
Abstract
In this paper, we describe a general-purpose dialogue management framework used to design SOPHIE (Standardized Online Patient for Healthcare Interaction Education). SOPHIE simulates a virtual standardized cancer patient that allows physicians to practice skills such as empathy and patient empowerment in end-of-life communication. To provide the user with an opportunity to practice these skills, SOPHIE must produce a natural, emotionally appropriate conversation, yet handle topic shifts and open-ended questions from the user. To accomplish this, our approach to dialogue management loosely followsschemas– explicit representations of thetypicalflows of dialogue in end-of-life communication – while also using flexible pattern-driven methods for interpretation and generation. We conduct a crowdsourced evaluation of conversations between medical students and SOPHIE. Our agent is judged to produce responses that are natural, emotionally appropriate, and consistent with her role as a cancer patient. Furthermore, it significantly outperforms an end-to-end neural model fine-tuned on a human standardized patient corpus, attesting to the advantages of a schema-guided approach in this domain. However, the system is currently limited in its ability to generate responses that are judged to demonstrate deep understanding of the user, suggesting that future work should place focus on integrating this framework with robust natural language understanding and commonsense reasoning methods.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Digital clinical empathy requires intentional strategies (timely acknowledgment, authenticity, appropriate boundary setting, contextual responsiveness) and may be best sustained through hybrid models combining AI-enabled support with human oversight.
“Studies measuring cancer-related live chat environments and simulation-based systems highlight that digital clinical empathy requires intentional strategies (ie, timely acknowledgment, authenticity, appropriate boundary setting, and contextual responsiveness) and may be best sustained through hybrid models that combine AI-enabled support with human oversight [34-36].”
From Empathic AI for Patient-Centered Cancer Care: A Scoping Review of Patient Navigation, Support, and Clinical Practice (2026) · cites this paper as [35]
Cites
Recipes for Building an Open-Domain Chatbot
Roller, S., Dinan, E., Goyal, N., Ju, D., Williamson, M., Liu, Y., Xu, J., Ott, M., Smith, E. M., Boureau, Y.-L., et al. (2021) · Proceedings of the 16th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Main Volume · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.eacl-main.24 · Cited by 784 · see citing works
Towards a Human-like Open-Domain Chatbot
Adiwardana, D., Luong, M.-T., So, D. R., Hall, J., Fiedel, N., Thoppilan, R., Yang, Z., Kulshreshtha, A., Nemade, G., Lu, Y., et al. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2001.09977 · Cited by 614 · see citing works
Constrained Language Models Yield Few-Shot Semantic Parsers
Shin, R., Lin, C., Thomson, S., Chen, C., Roy, S., Platanios, E. A., Pauls, A., Klein, D., Eisner, J., & Van Durme, B. (2021) · Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.emnlp-main.608 · Cited by 139 · cited 1× · see citing works
“In ongoing work, we’re experimenting with the incorporation of robust neural methods of gist clause extraction, such as few-shot prompting of large language models; past work has demonstrated that similar techniques are effective at mapping user inputs to more constrained forms [42].”
Method
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
White, B. M., Aitken, G. L., Zink, J. A., Kheirkhah Rahimabad, P., Kumsa, F. A., Hashtarkhani, S., Rashid, R., Kheirinejad, S., Girdwood, T., Brett, C. L., et al. (2026) · JMIR Cancer · doi:10.2196/82336 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
“Other researchers have used NLP approaches, such as analyzing emotion intensity or identifying psychosocial challenges, to address end-of-life discussions with patients with cancer and provide them with targeted resources specific to their stage of the cancer journey [22,24,35,36,41,56].”
- Authors
- Kane, B., Giugno, C., Schubert, L., Haut, K., Wohn, C., & Hoque, E.
- Affiliations
- University of Rochester (US)
- Department of Computer Science, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing
- Published
- 2024-07
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 1041-1052
- ISSN
- 1949-3045 (ISSN-L)
- 2371-9850
- OpenAlex
- W4386902886
- Cited by
- 5
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5
- FWCI
- 0.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (W911NF19-1-0029)
- National Science Foundation (IIS-1750380, 1748969)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech and dialogue systems
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
- Keywords
- dialogue management, virtual patients, standardized patients, cancer, end-of-life communication, empathy, patient empowerment, emotional dialogue, medical education, chatbots, crowdsourced evaluation, medical students, topic shift, open-ended questions
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review