CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 24Electronic Health Records SystemsTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationMobile Health and mHealth Applications

Automated Conversation System Before Pediatric Primary Care Visits: A Randomized Trial

Adams, William G., Phillips, Barrett D., Bacic, Janine D., Walsh, Kathleen E., Shanahan, Christopher W., Paasche-Orlow, Michael K.·2014·Pediatrics
DOI 10.1542/peds.2013-3759
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Interactive voice response systems integrated with electronic health records have the potential to improve primary care by engaging parents outside clinical settings via spoken language. The objective of this study was to determine whether use of an interactive voice response system, the Personal Health Partner (PHP), before routine health care maintenance visits could improve the quality of primary care visits and be well accepted by parents and clinicians. METHODS: English-speaking parents of children aged 4 months to 11 years called PHP before routine visits and were randomly assigned to groups by the system at the time of the call. Parents’ spoken responses were used to provide tailored counseling and support goal setting for the upcoming visit. Data were transferred to the electronic health records for review during visits. The study occurred in an urban hospital-based pediatric primary care center. Participants were called after the visit to assess (1) comprehensiveness of screening and counseling, (2) assessment of medications and their management, and (3) parent and clinician satisfaction. RESULTS: PHP was able to identify and counsel in multiple areas. A total of 9.7% of parents responded to the mailed invitation. Intervention parents were more likely to report discussing important issues such as depression (42.6% vs 25.4%; P < .01) and prescription medication use (85.7% vs 72.6%; P = .04) and to report being better prepared for visits. One hundred percent of clinicians reported that PHP improved the quality of their care. CONCLUSIONS: Systems like PHP have the potential to improve clinical screening, counseling, and medication management.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1542/peds.2013-3759

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Over 80% of users reported that the agents helped them follow their treatment more effectively, and over 80% reported being more prepared for pediatric visits.

    “Over 80% of users also reported that the agents helped them follow their treatment more effectively [45] and be more prepared for pediatric visits [9].”

    From The Effectiveness of Artificial Intelligence Conversational Agents in Health Care: Systematic Review (2020) · cites this paper as [9]

  • A study of a preparatory interactive voice response phone call before pediatric visits found that visit time was significantly reduced in the IVR group compared with the control group.

    “Regarding resource implications, the study of a preparatory IVR phone call before pediatric visits found that visit time was significantly reduced in the IVR group compared with the control group [9].”

    From The Effectiveness of Artificial Intelligence Conversational Agents in Health Care: Systematic Review (2020) · cites this paper as [9]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Adams, W. G., Phillips, B. D., Bacic, J. D., Walsh, K. E., Shanahan, C. W., & Paasche-Orlow, M. K.
Affiliations
  • General Pediatrics,
  • VA Central Western Massachusetts Healthcare System (US)
  • Health Policy and Management,
  • Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center (US)
  • Boston University (US)
  • General Internal Medicine, Boston University/Boston Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts;
ORCID
Venue
Pediatrics
Publisher
American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)
Published
2014-09-01
Volume
134
Issue
3
Pages
e691-e699
ISSN
  • 0031-4005 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-4275
DOI
10.1542/peds.2013-3759
OpenAlex
W2122473406
Cited by
24
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 1
FWCI
5.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • PEDIATRICS (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (R18HS017248)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
interactive voice response, pediatric primary care, parental involvement, electronic health records, medication management, depression screening, parental satisfaction, provider satisfaction, health maintenance visits
MeSH terms
Adult, Automation, Child, Child, Preschool, Counseling, Female, Humans, Infant, Male, Pediatrics, Primary Health Care, User-Computer Interface, Speech Recognition Software, Electronic Health Records

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