Cited by 73Digital Mental Health InterventionsWorkplace Health and Well-beingEmotion and Mood Recognition

Chatbot-Based Assessment of Employees’ Mental Health: Design Process and Pilot Implementation

Open access
Hungerbuehler, Ines, Daley, Kate, Cavanagh, Kate, Garcia Claro, Heloísa, Kapps, Michael·2021·JMIR Formative Research

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Background: Stress, burnout, and mental health problems such as depression and anxiety are common, and can significantly impact workplaces through absenteeism and reduced productivity. To address this issue, organizations must first understand the extent of the difficulties by mapping the mental health of their workforce. Online surveys are a cost-effective and scalable approach to achieve this but typically have low response rates, in part due to a lack of interactivity. Chatbots offer one potential solution, enhancing engagement through simulated natural human conversation and use of interactive features. Objective: The aim of this study was to explore if a text-based chatbot is a feasible approach to engage and motivate employees to complete a workplace mental health assessment. This paper describes the design process and results of a pilot implementation. Methods: A fully automated chatbot (“Viki”) was developed to evaluate employee risks of suffering from depression, anxiety, stress, insomnia, burnout, and work-related stress. Viki uses a conversation style and gamification features to enhance engagement. A cross-sectional analysis was performed to gain first insights of a pilot implementation within a small to medium–sized enterprise (120 employees). Results: The response rate was 64.2% (77/120). In total, 98 employees started the assessment, 77 of whom (79%) completed it. The majority of participants scored in the mild range for anxiety (20/40, 50%) and depression (16/28, 57%), in the moderate range for stress (10/22, 46%), and at the subthreshold level for insomnia (14/20, 70%) as defined by their questionnaire scores. Conclusions: A chatbot-based workplace mental health assessment seems to be a highly engaging and effective way to collect anonymized mental health data among employees with response rates comparable to those of face-to-face interviews.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/21678

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Nursing research has been predominantly focusing on the utilization of chatbots in areas such as mental health, weight management, antenatal education, and electronic fetal monitoring.

    “Nursing research has been predominantly focusing on the utilization of chatbots in areas such as mental health [18, 19], weight management [20, 21], antenatal education [22], and electronic fetal monitoring [16].”

    From Development and effects of a chatbot education program for self-directed learning in nursing students (2025) · cites this paper as [19]

    The Methods describe a pilot study using a chatbot to assess employees’ mental health, supporting the mental-health application to which this citation is attached. The paper describes a workplace study, not nursing research, and does not establish that nursing research has predominantly focused on this application. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 39 · Cited by 73

Authors
Hungerbuehler, I., Daley, K., Cavanagh, K., Garcia Claro, H., & Kapps, M.
Affiliations
University of Sussex (GB)
Corresponding author
Daley, Kate
Venue
JMIR Formative Research
Published
2021-04-21
Volume
5
Issue
4
Pages
e21678
ISSN
2561-326X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3156556004
Cited by
73
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 4
FWCI
11.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR Formative Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Sussex Research Online (University of Sussex) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Workplace Health and Well-being
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Emotion and Mood Recognition
Keywords
chatbots, workplace mental health, burnout, depression, anxiety, occupational stress, insomnia, gamification, response rate, employee engagement, small and medium-sized enterprises

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