Older adults' experience with virtual conversational agents for health data collection

Front Digit Health. 2023 Mar 15:5:1125926. doi: 10.3389/fdgth.2023.1125926. eCollection 2023.

Abstract

Introduction: Virtual conversational agents (i.e., chatbots) are an intuitive form of data collection. Understanding older adults' experiences with chatbots could help identify their usability needs. This quality improvement study evaluated older adults' experiences with a chatbot for health data collection. A secondary goal was to understand how perceptions differed based on length of chatbot forms.

Methods: After a demographic survey, participants (≥60 years) completed either a short (21 questions), moderate (30 questions), or long (66 questions) chatbot form. Perceived ease-of-use, usefulness, usability, likelihood to recommend, and cognitive load were measured post-test. Qualitative and quantitative analyses were used.

Results: A total of 260 participants reported on usability and satisfaction metrics including perceived ease-of-use (5.8/7), usefulness (4.7/7), usability (5.4/7), and likelihood to recommend (Net Promoter Score = 0). Cognitive load (12.3/100) was low. There was a statistically significant difference in perceived usefulness between groups, with a significantly higher mean perceived usefulness for Group 1 than Group 3. No other group differences were observed. The chatbot was perceived as quick, easy, and pleasant with concerns about technical issues, privacy, and security. Participants provided suggestions to enhance progress tracking, edit responses, improve readability, and have options to ask questions.

Discussion: Older adults found the chatbot to be easy, useful, and usable. The chatbot required low cognitive load demonstrating it could be an enjoyable health data collection tool for older adults. These results will inform the development of a health data collection chatbot technology.

Keywords: chatbot; health data collection; older adults; usability; user experience; virtual conversational agents.

Grants and funding

Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Library of Medicine of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number 1R41LM013419-01. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. BEB was funded by the National Institute of Mental Health (Grant Number K23MH118482).