Cited by 9Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationDigital Mental Health Interventions

Intelligent Conversational Agents in Patient Self-Management: A Systematic Survey Using Multi Data Sources

Open access
Xing Zhaopeng, Yu Fei, Qanir Yousef A. Mustafa, Guan Ting, Walker Jennifer, Song Lixin·2019·Studies in Health Technology and Informatics

Abstract

Intelligent conversation agents (ICAs) have been used for patient self-management and support in recent years. This study systematically reviewed ICA resarch and innovation in academic and industrial institutions using bibliometric and patent analysis. We reported the types of diseases and patients, and the ICAs delivery approaches for patient-self-management. We identified the gaps in the productivity and focused areas.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3233/shti190661

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Most reviews of conversational agents in health care have limited their focus to a particular health area, agent type, or function.

    “Despite the large body of research concerning the application of conversational agents in health care, most reviews have limited their focus to a particular health area, agent type, or function [10,19-22].”
  • The majority of reviews on conversational agents in health care focus on a specific therapy area or function.

    “Despite a wealth of literature on conversational agents and their application to health care, the majority of reviews on the topic focus on a specific therapy area or function, whereas few reviews have comprehensively examined the overall scope and progress in the field [20-23].”
  • Few reviews have comprehensively examined the overall scope and progress in the field of conversational agents in health care.

    “Despite a wealth of literature on conversational agents and their application to health care, the majority of reviews on the topic focus on a specific therapy area or function, whereas few reviews have comprehensively examined the overall scope and progress in the field [20-23].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 6 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhaopeng, X., Fei, Y., Mustafa, Q. Y. A., Ting, G., Jennifer, W., & Lixin, S.
Affiliations
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Venue
Studies in Health Technology and Informatics
Publisher
IOS Press
Published
2019
Volume
264
Pages
1813-1814
ISSN
0926-9630 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2973004460
Cited by
9
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1
FWCI
3.59
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Studies in health technology and informatics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed
Funders
  • National Cancer Institute (R21CA212516)
  • National Institute of Nursing Research (R01NR016990)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
patient self-management, chatbots, bibliometric analysis, patent analysis, research gaps, disease type, patient support
MeSH terms
Self-Management, Communication, Humans, Intelligence, Surveys and Questionnaires, Bibliometrics, Information Storage and Retrieval

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