Search

BackgroundHealth care and well-being are 2 main interconnected application areas of conversational agents (CAs). There is a significant increase in research, development, and commercial implementations in this area. In parallel to the increasing interest, new challenges in designing and evaluating CAs have emerged. ObjectiveThis study aims to identify key design, development, and evaluation challenges of CAs in health care and well-being research. The focus is on the very recent projects with their emerging challenges. MethodsA review study was conducted with 17 invited studies, most of which were presented at the ACM (Association for Computing Machinery) CHI 2020 conference workshop on CAs for health and well-being. Eligibility criteria required the studies to involve a CA applied to a health or well-being project (ongoing or recently finished). The participating studies were asked to report on their projects’ design and evaluation challenges. We used thematic analysis to review the studies. ResultsThe findings include a range of topics from primary care to caring for older adults to health coaching. We identified 4 major themes: (1) Domain Information and Integration, (2) User-System Interaction and Partnership, (3) Evaluation, and (4) Conversational Competence. ConclusionsCAs proved their worth during the pandemic as health screening tools, and are expected to stay to further support various health care domains, especially personal health care. Growth in investment in CAs also shows the value as a personal assistant. Our study shows that while some challenges are shared with other CA application areas, safety and privacy remain the major challenges in the health care and well-being domains. An increased level of collaboration across different institutions and entities may be a promising direction to address some of the major challenges that otherwise would be too complex to be addressed by the projects with their limited scope and budget.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005232.].

Type 2 diabetes leads to premature death and reduced quality of life for 8% of Americans. Nutrition management is critical to maintaining glycemic control, yet it is difficult to achieve due to the high individual differences in glycemic response to nutrition. Anticipating glycemic impact of different meals can be challenging not only for individuals with diabetes, but also for expert diabetes educators. Personalized computational models that can accurately forecast an impact of a given meal on an individual's blood glucose levels can serve as the engine for a new generation of decision support tools for individuals with diabetes. However, to be useful in practice, these computational engines need to generate accurate forecasts based on limited datasets consistent with typical self-monitoring practices of individuals with type 2 diabetes. This paper uses three forecasting machines: (i) data assimilation, a technique borrowed from atmospheric physics and engineering that uses Bayesian modeling to infuse data with human knowledge represented in a mechanistic model, to generate real-time, personalized, adaptable glucose forecasts; (ii) model averaging of data assimilation output; and (iii) dynamical Gaussian process model regression. The proposed data assimilation machine, the primary focus of the paper, uses a modified dual unscented Kalman filter to estimate states and parameters, personalizing the mechanistic models. Model selection is used to make a personalized model selection for the individual and their measurement characteristics. The data assimilation forecasts are empirically evaluated against actual postprandial glucose measurements captured by individuals with type 2 diabetes, and against predictions generated by experienced diabetes educators after reviewing a set of historical nutritional records and glucose measurements for the same individual. The evaluation suggests that the data assimilation forecasts compare well with specific glucose measurements and match or exceed in accuracy expert forecasts. We conclude by examining ways to present predictions as forecast-derived range quantities and evaluate the comparative advantages of these ranges.