arXiv AI

LLMs for health: Perceived benefits, risks, intention to use AI chatbots, and willingness to self-disclose across sensitive health topics

arXiv:2607. 09253v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AI chatbots are increasingly used for answering health-related questions.

arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 21

Generative Artificial Intelligence Chatbots for Motivational Interviewing: A Scoping Review From System Design to Intervention Outcomes

This scoping review examined 48 studies on generative AI chatbots designed to deliver motivational interviewing (MI). It found that most systems were text‑based and disembodied, with about half incorporating dynamic adaptation, and that safety reporting was inconsistent. While user perceptions were generally positive and many studies reported MI‑consistent interactions, evidence for sustained behavioral or functional change remains limited.

By Runze Hu, Jingqi Kong, Yang Yang, Yihang Yang, Jingyao Liu, Haizhou Tang, Shanghang Zhang, Zheng Liu
arXiv AI
Sep 15

Personalizing Personal Health Interfaces: Co-Design with Generative AI

The paper explores how generative AI can lower the barrier to personalizing health dashboards by enabling users to co-design interfaces in Figma Make. In a study with 14 participants, redesigns of Google and Apple Health focused on personal context, future planning, and interactive experiences, though conversational AI designs tended toward chat-window conventions. AI facilitated the materialization of loosely articulated ideas, yet model defaults and generation latency influenced iteration, and the process highlighted interpretability and accountability over privacy, trust, and emotional safety.

By Karthik S. Bhat, Vidhi Shah, Vedika Agnihotri, Dong Whi Yoo, Koustuv Saha
arXiv AI
Aug 28

Communication styles and reader preferences of LLM- and human-authored COVID-19 information explanations: a case study

The study compares communication styles of large language models (LLMs) and humans in explaining COVID‑19 misinformation, using a dataset of 1,498 fact‑checking claims and 99 blinded reader evaluations. LLM‑generated explanations scored lower on persuasive strategies, certainty, and alignment with social values, yet over 60% of participants preferred LLM content for clarity, completeness, and persuasiveness. The findings suggest that reader preference may not align with traditional measures of communication quality, highlighting both the promise and limits of LLMs in health communication.

By Jiawei Zhou, Kritika Venkatachalam, Minje Choi, Koustuv Saha, Munmun De Choudhury