Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 minor 2 cited by

RECOVER: Designing a Large Language Model-based Remote Patient Monitoring System for Postoperative Gastrointestinal Cancer Care

T0 review · 0 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-05-23 · grok-4.3

Challenge this review Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read RECOVER integrates six design strategies from participatory sessions into an LLM-based remote monitoring system for GI cancer patients after surgery.

desk verdict This is a standard early-stage HCI design study that delivers a concrete LLM-based RPM prototype and six strategies from small participatory sessions, but the pilot adds little beyond description. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.05740 v2 submitted 2025-02-09 cs.HC cs.AI

Ziqi Yang , Yuxuan Lu , Jennifer Bagdasarian , Vedant Das Swain , Ritu Agarwal , Collin Campbell , Waddah Al-Refaire , Jehan El-Bayoumi
show 4 more authors
Guodong Gao Dakuo Wang Bingsheng Yao Nawar Shara
This is my paper
classification cs.HCcs.AI
keywords remotepatientmonitoringlargelanguagemodelspostoperativecaregastrointestinalcancerparticipatorydesignconversationalagentclinicaldashboardhealthcareAI
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper describes how researchers designed RECOVER, an LLM-powered remote patient monitoring system for postoperative gastrointestinal cancer care. They ran seven participatory design sessions with five clinical staff and interviewed five patients to identify six strategies that embed clinical guidelines and patient needs into LLM applications. From those strategies the team built a conversational agent that patients can talk to and an interactive dashboard that staff can use to track recovery. A pilot test with four staff and five patients then evaluated how well the strategies worked in practice. The work shows a concrete way to bring stakeholder input into LLM tools for a setting where complications after cancer surgery are hard to predict and can be serious.

What carries the argument

Six major design strategies derived from participatory design sessions for integrating clinical guidelines and information needs into LLM-based RPM systems.

What would settle it

A controlled trial in which patients monitored with the RECOVER conversational agent show no reduction in undetected postoperative complications compared with patients using standard follow-up calls would show the design strategies do not deliver the intended clinical benefit.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Through participatory design sessions with clinical staff and interviews with cancer patients the authors derived six major design strategies for integrating clinical guidelines and information needs into LLM-based remote patient monitoring systems. These strategies shaped the implementation of RECOVER, which includes an LLM-powered conversational agent for patients and an interactive dashboard for staff, and were assessed in a pilot study that identified crucial design elements and offered implications for responsible AI use in postoperative care.

Load-bearing premise

The six design strategies drawn from seven sessions with five clinical staff and five patient interviews are sufficient to produce an effective and responsible LLM integration for postoperative remote monitoring.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The conversational agent supplies patients with responses aligned to their specific postoperative information needs.
  • The interactive dashboard enables clinical staff to review patient data and LLM-generated insights more efficiently than before.
  • Embedding the six strategies ensures LLM outputs remain consistent with established clinical guidelines.
  • Pilot feedback highlights specific design elements needed for responsible AI deployment in this clinical context.
  • The same strategies can guide development of additional LLM-powered remote monitoring tools.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The participatory method used here could be repeated for designing LLM tools that monitor recovery after other types of major surgery.
  • A larger study that tracks actual rates of early complication detection would be required to confirm clinical value beyond the pilot.
  • Linking the dashboard to existing electronic health record systems could reduce manual data entry and increase staff adoption.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

0 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims to have engaged stakeholders via seven participatory design sessions with five clinical staff and interviews with five cancer patients to derive six major design strategies for LLM integration in remote patient monitoring. These informed the design and implementation of RECOVER, featuring an LLM-powered conversational agent for patients and an interactive dashboard for staff. A pilot with four clinical staff and five patients was then conducted to assess the strategies, yielding design implications on crucial elements, responsible AI, and future opportunities for LLM-powered RPM in postoperative GI cancer care.

Significance. If the reported design process and implications hold, the work contributes a stakeholder-centered case study to HCI research on clinical AI systems. Strengths include the explicit participatory approach with both staff and patients, the translation of sessions into concrete system features, and the pilot evaluation that surfaces responsible-AI considerations. These elements provide transferable insights for integrating clinical guidelines into LLM-based RPM without overclaiming efficacy or generalizability.

minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the claim that the pilot 'assess[es] the implementation of our design strategies' would be strengthened by briefly naming the evaluation method (e.g., thematic analysis of interviews or observation notes) so readers can judge how the design implications were generated.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: the participant counts (five staff, five patients for design; four staff, five patients for pilot) are appropriate for early-stage work but could be accompanied by a short statement on recruitment and session structure to clarify the depth of engagement.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive summary, significance assessment, and recommendation of minor revision. The feedback correctly identifies the participatory design process, translation into system features, and responsible-AI insights as core contributions. No major comments were enumerated in the report.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; qualitative design study with no equations or fitted predictions

full rationale

The paper describes a participatory design process yielding six strategies from sessions, followed by system implementation and a small pilot evaluation. No mathematical derivations, parameters, predictions, uniqueness theorems, or self-referential reductions exist. All claims are descriptive of the design activities performed; the central output (design implications) is directly produced by the reported sessions and pilot rather than derived from prior fitted values or self-citations that collapse the argument. This matches the default expectation for non-circular qualitative HCI work.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 1 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper rests on standard HCI assumptions that participatory design with small stakeholder groups yields generalizable strategies and that LLM conversational agents can be safely integrated into clinical workflows when guided by those strategies. No free parameters, invented entities, or ad-hoc mathematical axioms are introduced.

assumptions (1)
  • domain assumption Participatory design sessions with clinical staff and patients produce actionable and responsible design strategies for LLM-based clinical systems.
    Invoked in the derivation of the six major design strategies from the seven sessions and interviews.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of RECOVER: Designing a Large Language Model-based Remote Patient Monitoring System for Postoperative Gastrointestinal Cancer Care." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2502.05740

@misc{pith2026250205740,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: RECOVER: Designing a Large Language Model-based Remote Patient Monitoring System for Postoperative Gastrointestinal Cancer Care},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2502.05740}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.05740}
}
read the original abstract

Cancer surgery is a key treatment for gastrointestinal (GI) cancers, a group of cancers that account for more than 35% of cancer-related deaths worldwide, but postoperative complications are unpredictable and can be life-threatening. In this paper, we investigate how recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) can benefit remote patient monitoring (RPM) systems through clinical integration by designing RECOVER, an LLM-powered RPM system for postoperative GI cancer care. To closely engage stakeholders in the design process, we first conducted seven participatory design sessions with five clinical staff and interviewed five cancer patients to derive six major design strategies for integrating clinical guidelines and information needs into LLM-based RPM systems. We then designed and implemented RECOVER, which features an LLM-powered conversational agent for cancer patients and an interactive dashboard for clinical staff to enable efficient postoperative RPM. Finally, we used RECOVER as a pilot system to assess the implementation of our design strategies with four clinical staff and five patients, providing design implications by identifying crucial design elements, offering insights on responsible AI, and outlining opportunities for future LLM-powered RPM systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.05740 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Overview of RECOVER, an LLM-powered RPM system integrating a conversational agent and an interactive dashboard [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. PD sessions and their participants, discussion artifacts, and agenda. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. A PD session where participants commented on the conversation flow, and dashboard design version; the research [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (10 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Dashboard Iteration Process. In each section, we present the key design versions of the corresponding module, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: System architecture of RECOVER. The red, purple, and blue arrows represent data generated by the Conversation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Final Design of the RECOVER Dashboard. We present three key sections and the major interaction flow that connects them: (1) from patient list to patient detail, (2a) from patient list to key questions, (2b) from key questions visualization to detailed log, and (3) from…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Visualization of Key Questions: An example of the local interactions within each section. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Technical Architecture. Our system backend modules are built upon OpenAI API and connected to a Postgre SQL [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Our user study session. A participant is navigating on the dashboard to complete the given task to review patient [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The first version of dashboard interface design. This version only include simple interactions like selecting patient [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Example of participants’ comments in Google Docs. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p034_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Example of conversation flow iteration. , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication date: February 2023 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p035_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Participants discussed the color coding depending on the priority of a symptom, and which questions should include [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p036_13.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Multi-Agent-as-Judge: Aligning LLM-Agent-Based Automated Evaluation with Multi-Dimensional Human Evaluation

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    MAJ-EVAL, a document-grounded persona-based multi-agent debate evaluator, correlates more strongly with expert ratings than ROUGE, BERTScore, G-Eval, and ChatEval on children's QA and medical summarization tasks.

  2. Bridging Knowledge Gaps in Clinical AI: An Activity Theory Perspective on Interdisciplinary Data Work for Telehealth

    cs.HC 2024-09 unverdicted novelty 3.0 of 10

    Qualitative interviews analyzed via Activity Theory identify clinical data as boundary objects and collaborators as knowledge brokers that address knowledge gaps in early-stage clinical AI for telehealth.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

141 extracted references · 141 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    [n. d.]. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) | Protocol Development | CTEP. https://ctep.cancer.gov/protocolDevelopment/electronic_applications/ctc.htm

    work page

  2. [2]

    [n. d.]. Fitbit Wear-Time and Patterns of Activity in Cancer Survivors throughout a Physical Activ- ity Intervention and Follow-up: Exploratory Analysis from a Randomised Controlled Trial | PLOS ONE. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0240967

    work page doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0240967

  3. [3]

    Daniel A Adler, Yuewen Yang, Thalia Viranda, Xuhai Xu, David C Mohr, Anna R Van Meter, Julia C Tartaglia, Nicholas C Jacobson, Fei Wang, Deborah Estrin, et al. 2024. Beyond Detection: Towards Actionable Sensing Research in Clinical Mental Healthcare. Proceedings of the ACM on interactive, mobile, wearable and ubiquitous technologies 8, 4 (2024), 1–33

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    Monica Agrawal, Stefan Hegselmann, Hunter Lang, Yoon Kim, and David Sontag. 2022. Large Language Models Are Few-Shot Clinical Information Extractors. In Proceedings of the 2022 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , Yoav Goldberg, Zornitsa Kozareva, and Yue Zhang (Eds.). Association for Computational Linguistics, Abu Dhabi, Unite...

    work page doi:10.18653/v1/2022.emnlp-main.130 2022

  5. [5]

    Monica Agrawal, Stefan Hegselmann, Hunter Lang, Yoon Kim, and David Sontag. 2022. Large Language Models are Few-Shot Clinical Information Extractors. http://arxiv.org/abs/2205.12689 arXiv:2205.12689 [cs]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2022

  6. [6]

    Lakshmi Arbatti, Abhishek Hosamath, Vikram Ramanarayanan, and Ira Shoulson. 2023. What Do Patients Say About Their Disease Symptoms? Deep Multilabel Text Classification With Human-in-the-Loop Curation for Automatic Labeling of Patient Self Reports of , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication date: February 2023. RECOVER • 25 Problems

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    Gastroenterology (2020)

    Melina Arnold, Christian C. Abnet, Rachel E. Neale, Jerome Vignat, Edward L. Giovannucci, Katherine A. McGlynn, and Freddie Bray. 2020. Global Burden of 5 Major Types of Gastrointestinal Cancer. Gastroenterology 159, 1 (July 2020), 335–349.e15. https: //doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2020.02.068

    work page doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2020.02.068 2020

  8. [8]

    Alejandro Barredo Arrieta, Natalia Díaz-Rodríguez, Javier Del Ser, Adrien Bennetot, Siham Tabik, Alberto Barbado, Salvador García, Sergio Gil-López, Daniel Molina, Richard Benjamins, et al . 2020. Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI. Information fusion 58 (2020), 82–115

    work page 2020

Show all 141 references
  1. [9]

    Aaron Bangor, Philip T Kortum, and James T Miller. 2008. An empirical evaluation of the system usability scale. Intl. Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 24, 6 (2008), 574–594

    2008

  2. [10]

    Emma Beede, Elizabeth Baylor, Fred Hersch, Anna Iurchenko, Lauren Wilcox, Paisan Ruamviboonsuk, and Laura M Vardoulakis. 2020. A human-centered evaluation of a deep learning system deployed in clinics for the detection of diabetic retinopathy. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI co...

    2020

  3. [11]

    Karthik S Bhat, Mohit Jain, and Neha Kumar. 2021. Infrastructuring Telehealth in (In)Formal Patient-Doctor Contexts. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5, CSCW2 (Oct. 2021), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1145/3476064

    2021 doi

  4. [12]

    Diogo Branco, Margarida Móteiro, Raquel Bouça-Machado, Rita Miranda, Tiago Reis, Élia Decoroso, Rita Cardoso, Joana Ramalho, Filipa Rato, Joana Malheiro, et al. 2024. Co-designing Customizable Clinical Dashboards with Multidisciplinary Teams: Bridging the Gap in Chronic Diseas...

    2024

  5. [13]

    Hylke JF Brenkman, Leonie Haverkamp, Jelle P Ruurda, and Richard van Hillegersberg. 2016. Worldwide practice in gastric cancer surgery. World journal of gastroenterology 22, 15 (2016), 4041

    2016

  6. [14]

    John Brooke. 1995. SUS: A quick and dirty usability scale. Usability Eval. Ind. 189 (11 1995)

    1995

  7. [15]

    Tom B. Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah, Jared Kaplan, Prafulla Dhariwal, Arvind Neelakantan, Pranav Shyam, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Sandhini Agarwal, Ariel Herbert-Voss, Gretchen Krueger, Tom Henighan, Rewon Child, Aditya Ramesh, Daniel M. Ziegler, Jeffr...

    2020

  8. [16]

    Coburn, Anna Gagliardi, Barbara-Anne Maier, Elisa Greco, Linda Last, Andrew J

    Jonathan Cardella, Natalie G. Coburn, Anna Gagliardi, Barbara-Anne Maier, Elisa Greco, Linda Last, Andrew J. Smith, Calvin Law, and Frances Wright. 2008. Compliance, Attitudes and Barriers to Post-Operative Colorectal Cancer Follow-Up. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practic...

    2008 doi

  9. [17]

    Lauren Carmichael, Rose Rocca, Erin Laing, Phoebe Ashford, Jesse Collins, Luke Jackson, Lauren McPherson, Brydie Pendergast, and Nicole Kiss. 2022. Early Postoperative Feeding Following Surgery for Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer: A Systematic Review. Journal of Human Nutrition ...

    2022 doi

  10. [18]

    Marco Cascella, Jonathan Montomoli, Valentina Bellini, and Elena Bignami. 2023. Evaluating the feasibility of ChatGPT in healthcare: an analysis of multiple clinical and research scenarios. Journal of Medical Systems 47, 1 (2023), 33

    2023

  11. [19]

    Mango Mango, How to Let The Lettuce Dry Without A Spinner?

    Szeyi Chan, Jiachen Li, Bingsheng Yao, Amama Mahmood, Chien-Ming Huang, Holly Jimison, Elizabeth D. Mynatt, and Dakuo Wang. 2023. "Mango Mango, How to Let The Lettuce Dry Without A Spinner?”: Exploring User Perceptions of Using An LLM-Based Conversational Assistant Toward Cook...

    2023 doi

  12. [20]

    Rajesh Chandwani and Neha Kumar. 2018. Stitching Infrastructures to Facilitate Telemedicine for Low-Resource Environments. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Montreal QC Canada, 1–12. https: //doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173958

    2018 doi

  13. [21]

    Chen, Chinmaya U

    Kevin A. Chen, Chinmaya U. Joisa, Karyn B. Stitzenberg, Jonathan Stem, Jose G. Guillem, Shawn M. Gomez, and Muneera R. Kapadia. 2022. Development and Validation of Machine Learning Models to Predict Readmission After Colorectal Surgery. Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 26, ...

    2022 doi

  14. [22]

    Yuxuan Chen, Haoyan Yang, Hengkai Pan, Fardeen Siddiqui, Antonio Verdone, Qingyang Zhang, Sumit Chopra, Chen Zhao, and Yiqiu Shen. 2024. Burextract-llama: An llm for clinical concept extraction in breast ultrasound reports. In Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on M...

    2024

  15. [23]

    Chloe Chira, Evangelos Mathioudis, Christina Michailidou, Pantelis Agathangelou, Georgia Christodoulou, Ioannis Katakis, Efstratios Kontopoulos, and Konstantinos Avgerinakis. 2022. An Affective Multi-modal Conversational Agent for Non Intrusive Data Collection from Patients wi...

    2022

  16. [24]

    Avishek Choudhury, Onur Asan, et al. 2020. Role of artificial intelligence in patient safety outcomes: systematic literature review. JMIR medical informatics 8, 7 (2020), e18599

    2020

  17. [25]

    Juliet Clark and Aisling Kelliher. 2021. Understanding the Needs and Values of Rehabilitation Therapists in Designing and Implementing Telehealth Solutions. In Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Yokohama Japan, 1–6. https...

    2021 doi

  18. [26]

    I Glenn Cohen and Michelle M Mello. 2019. Big data, big tech, and protecting patient privacy. Jama 322, 12 (2019), 1141–1142. , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication date: February 2023. 26 • Yang et al

    2019

  19. [27]

    Sarah E Cousins, Emma Tempest, and David J Feuer. 2016. Surgery for the resolution of symptoms in malignant bowel obstruction in advanced gynaecological and gastrointestinal cancer. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 1 (2016)

    2016

  20. [28]

    J Desrame, V Heinschild, C Desauw, AC Fuerea, P Artru, S Javed, T Papazyan, C Ferté, M Autheman, M Valery, et al . 2024. 595P Adoption of remote patient monitoring in gastrointestinal oncology: A real-world experience from 1822 patients across 47 centers in France and Belgium....

    2024

  21. [29]

    Virginia Dignum. 2019. Responsible artificial intelligence: how to develop and use AI in a responsible way . Vol. 2156. Springer

    2019

  22. [30]

    Hartman, Emily C

    Nickolas Dreher, Edward Kenji Hadeler, Sheri J. Hartman, Emily C. Wong, Irene Acerbi, Hope S. Rugo, Melanie Catherine Majure, Amy Jo Chien, Laura J. Esserman, and Michelle E. Melisko. 2019. Fitbit Usage in Patients With Breast Cancer Undergoing Chemotherapy. Clinical Breast Ca...

    2019 doi

  23. [31]

    Tim Dwyer, Graeme Hoit, David Burns, James Higgins, Justin Chang, Daniel Whelan, Irene Kiroplis, and Jaskarndip Chahal. 2023. Use of an artificial intelligence conversational agent (chatbot) for hip arthroscopy patients following surgery. Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and Reha...

    2023

  24. [32]

    Emilio Ferrara. 2024. Large language models for wearable sensor-based human activity recognition, health monitoring, and behavioral modeling: A survey of early trends, datasets, and challenges. Sensors 24, 15 (2024), 5045

    2024

  25. [33]

    Inc. Figma. 2024. Figma: the collaborative interface design tool . https://www.figma.com

    2024

  26. [34]

    A. K. Garth, C. M. Newsome, N. Simmance, and T. C. Crowe. 2010. Nutritional Status, Nutrition Practices and Post-Operative Complications in Patients with Gastrointestinal Cancer. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics 23, 4 (2010), 393–401. https: //doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-27...

    2010 doi

  27. [35]

    Michelle Louise Gatt, Maria Cassar, and Sandra C Buttigieg. 2022. A review of literature on risk prediction tools for hospital readmissions in older adults. Journal of Health Organization and Management 36, 4 (2022), 521–557

    2022

  28. [36]

    L Geoghegan, A Scarborough, JCR Wormald, CJ Harrison, D Collins, M Gardiner, Julie Bruce, and JN Rodrigues. 2021. Automated conversational agents for post-intervention follow-up: a systematic review. BJS open 5, 4 (2021), zrab070

    2021

  29. [37]

    Alireza Ghods, Armin Shahrokni, Hassan Ghasemzadeh, and Diane Cook. 2021. Remote monitoring of the performance status and burden of symptoms of patients with gastrointestinal cancer via a consumer-based activity tracker: quantitative cohort study. JMIR cancer 7, 4 (2021), e22931

    2021

  30. [38]

    Gonçalves-Bradley, Ana Rita J

    Daniela C. Gonçalves-Bradley, Ana Rita J. Maria, Ignacio Ricci-Cabello, Gemma Villanueva, Marita S. Fønhus, Claire Glenton, Simon Lewin, Nicholas Henschke, Brian S. Buckley, Garrett L. Mehl, Tigest Tamrat, and Sasha Shepperd. 2020. Mobile technologies to support healthcare pro...

    2020 doi

  31. [39]

    den Hamer, Perry Schoor, Tobias B

    Danny M. den Hamer, Perry Schoor, Tobias B. Polak, and Daniel Kapitan. 2023. Improving Patient Pre-screening for Clinical Trials: Assisting Physicians with Large Language Models. http://arxiv.org/abs/2304.07396 arXiv:2304.07396 [cs]

    2023

  32. [40]

    Yuexing Hao, Jason Holmes, Mark Waddle, Nathan Yu, Kirstin Vickers, Heather Preston, Drew Margolin, Corinna E Löckenhoff, Aditya Vashistha, Marzyeh Ghassemi, et al. 2024. Outlining the Borders for LLM Applications in Patient Education: Developing an Expert-in-the-Loop LLM-Powe...

    2024

  33. [41]

    Yuexing Hao, Zeyu Liu, Robert N Riter, and Saleh Kalantari. 2024. Advancing Patient-Centered Shared Decision-Making with AI Systems for Older Adult Cancer Patients. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . 1–20

    2024

  34. [42]

    Claudia E Haupt and Mason Marks. 2023. AI-generated medical advice—GPT and beyond. Jama 329, 16 (2023), 1349–1350

    2023

  35. [43]

    Elizabeth Healey and Isaac Kohane. 2024. LLM-CGM: A Benchmark for Large Language Model-Enabled Querying of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Data for Conversational Diabetes Management. In Biocomputing 2025: Proceedings of the Pacific Symposium . World Scientific, 82–93

    2024

  36. [44]

    Thanh Cong Ho, Farah Kharrat, Abderrazek Abid, Fakhri Karray, and Anis Koubaa. 2024. REMONI: An Autonomous System Integrating Wearables and Multimodal Large Language Models for Enhanced Remote Health Monitoring. In 2024 IEEE International Symposium on Medical Measurements and ...

    2024

  37. [45]

    Perttu Hämäläinen, Mikke Tavast, and Anton Kunnari. 2023. Evaluating Large Language Models in Generating Synthetic HCI Research Data: a Case Study. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . ACM, Hamburg Germany, 1–19. https://doi.org/10....

    2023 doi

  38. [46]

    Maia Jacobs, Jeremy Johnson, and Elizabeth D. Mynatt. 2018. MyPath: Investigating Breast Cancer Patients’ Use of Personalized Health Information. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 2, CSCW (Nov. 2018), 78:1–78:21. https://doi.org/10.1145/3274347

    2018 doi

  39. [47]

    Epstein, Hyunhoon Jung, and Young-Ho Kim

    Eunkyung Jo, Daniel A. Epstein, Hyunhoon Jung, and Young-Ho Kim. 2023. Understanding the Benefits and Challenges of Deploying Conversational AI Leveraging Large Language Models for Public Health Intervention. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Comput...

    2023 doi

  40. [48]

    Maura Kennedy, Richard A Enander, Sarah P Tadiri, Richard E Wolfe, Nathan I Shapiro, and Edward R Marcantonio. 2014. Delirium risk prediction, healthcare use and mortality of elderly adults in the emergency department. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 62, 3 (2014), 4...

    2014

  41. [49]

    Charalampia (Xaroula) Kerasidou, Angeliki Kerasidou, Monika Buscher, and Stephen Wilkinson. 2022. Before and beyond Trust: Reliance in Medical AI. Journal of Medical Ethics 48, 11 (Nov. 2022), 852–856. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2020-107095

    2022 doi

  42. [50]

    King, Judith Moskowitz, Begum Egilmez, Shibo Zhang, Lida Zhang, Michael Bass, John Rogers, Roozbeh Ghaffari, Laurie Wakschlag, and Nabil Alshurafa

    Zachary D. King, Judith Moskowitz, Begum Egilmez, Shibo Zhang, Lida Zhang, Michael Bass, John Rogers, Roozbeh Ghaffari, Laurie Wakschlag, and Nabil Alshurafa. 2019. Micro-Stress EMA: A Passive Sensing Framework for Detecting in-the-Wild Stress in Pregnant Mothers. Proceedings ...

    2019 doi

  43. [51]

    A Baki Kocaballi, Kiran Ijaz, Liliana Laranjo, Juan C Quiroz, Dana Rezazadegan, Huong Ly Tong, Simon Willcock, Shlomo Berkovsky, and Enrico Coiera. 2020. Envisioning an artificial intelligence documentation assistant for future primary care consultations: A co-design study wit...

    2020

  44. [52]

    Julia Lai-Kwon, Claudia Rutherford, Stephanie Best, Thai Ly, Iris Zhang, Catherine Devereux, Dishan Herath, Kate Burbury, and Michael Jefford. 2024. Co-design of an electronic patient-reported outcome symptom monitoring system for immunotherapy toxicities. Supportive Care in C...

    2024

  45. [53]

    Jinhyuk Lee, Wonjin Yoon, Sungdong Kim, Donghyeon Kim, Sunkyu Kim, Chan Ho So, and Jaewoo Kang. 2019. BioBERT: A Pre-Trained Biomedical Language Representation Model for Biomedical Text Mining. Bioinformatics (Sept. 2019), btz682. https://doi.org/10/ggh5qq

    2019

  46. [54]

    Peter Lee, Sebastien Bubeck, and Joseph Petro. 2023. Benefits, limits, and risks of GPT-4 as an AI chatbot for medicine. New England Journal of Medicine 388, 13 (2023), 1233–1239

    2023

  47. [55]

    Maria Alejandra León, Valeria Pannunzio, and Maaike Kleinsmann. 2022. The impact of perioperative remote patient monitoring on clinical staff workflows: scoping review. JMIR Human Factors 9, 2 (2022), e37204

    2022

  48. [56]

    James R Lewis. 2018. The system usability scale: past, present, and future. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 34, 7 (2018), 577–590

    2018

  49. [57]

    Brenna Li, Ofek Gross, Noah Crampton, Mamta Kapoor, Saba Tauseef, Mohit Jain, Khai N Truong, and Alex Mariakakis. 2024. Beyond the Waiting Room: Patient’s Perspectives on the Conversational Nuances of Pre-Consultation Chatbots. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Fac...

    2024

  50. [58]

    Binbin Li, Tianxin Meng, Xiaoming Shi, Jie Zhai, and Tong Ruan. 2023. Meddm: Llm-executable clinical guidance tree for clinical decision-making. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.02441 (2023)

    2023

  51. [59]

    Hongjin Lin, Tessa Han, Krzysztof Z Gajos, and Anoopum S Gupta. 2024. Hevelius Report: Visualizing Web-Based Mobility Test Data For Clinical Decision and Learning Support. In Proceedings of the 26th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility. 1–10

    2024

  52. [60]

    Xin Liu, Daniel McDuff, Geza Kovacs, Isaac Galatzer-Levy, Jacob Sunshine, Jiening Zhan, Ming-Zher Poh, Shun Liao, Paolo Di Achille, and Shwetak Patel. 2023. Large Language Models Are Few-Shot Health Learners. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2305.15525 arXiv:2305.15525 [cs]

    2023 doi

  53. [61]

    Yuxuan Lu, Jingya Yan, Zhixuan Qi, Zhongzheng Ge, and Yongping Du. 2022. Contextual Embedding and Model Weighting by Fusing Domain Knowledge on Biomedical Question Answering. In Proceedings of the 13th ACM International Conference on Bioinformatics, Computational Biology and H...

    2022 doi

  54. [62]

    Amama Mahmood, Junxiang Wang, Bingsheng Yao, Dakuo Wang, and Chien-Ming Huang. 2023. LLM-Powered Conversational Voice Assistants: Interaction Patterns, Opportunities, Challenges, and Design Guidelines. arXiv:2309.13879 [cs]

    2023

  55. [63]

    Malasinghe, Naeem Ramzan, and Keshav Dahal

    Lakmini P. Malasinghe, Naeem Ramzan, and Keshav Dahal. 2019. Remote Patient Monitoring: A Comprehensive Study. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing 10, 1 (Jan. 2019), 57–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-017-0598-x

    2019 doi

  56. [64]

    Jayson S Marwaha, Adam B Landman, Gabriel A Brat, Todd Dunn, and William J Gordon. 2022. Deploying digital health tools within large, complex health systems: key considerations for adoption and implementation. NPJ digital medicine 5, 1 (2022), 13

    2022

  57. [65]

    George Michalopoulos, Yuanxin Wang, Hussam Kaka, Helen Chen, and Alexander Wong. 2021. UmlsBERT: Clinical Domain Knowledge Augmentation of Contextual Embeddings Using the Unified Medical Language System Metathesaurus. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv. 2010.10391 arXiv:2010.10391 [cs]

    2021 doi

  58. [66]

    Lucian Mocan. 2021. Surgical Management of Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review. Journal of Clinical Medicine 10, 12 (Jan. 2021),

    2021

  59. [67]

    https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10122557

    doi

  60. [68]

    Sara Montagna, Stefano Ferretti, Lorenz Cuno Klopfenstein, Antonio Florio, and Martino Francesco Pengo. 2023. Data Decentralisation of LLM-Based Chatbot Systems in Chronic Disease Self-Management. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Information Technology for Social G...

    2023

  61. [69]

    Blake Murdoch. 2021. Privacy and artificial intelligence: challenges for protecting health information in a new era. BMC Medical Ethics 22 (2021), 1–5

    2021

  62. [70]

    Varun Nair, Elliot Schumacher, and Anitha Kannan. 2023. Generating medically-accurate summaries of patient-provider dialogue: A multi-stage approach using large language models. http://arxiv.org/abs/2305.05982 arXiv:2305.05982 [cs]

    2023

  63. [71]

    Lin Ni, Chenhao Lu, Niu Liu, and Jiamou Liu. 2017. Mandy: Towards a smart primary care chatbot application. In International symposium on knowledge and systems sciences . Springer, 38–52. , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication date: February 2023. 28 • Yang et al

    2017

  64. [72]

    Harsha Nori, Nicholas King, Scott Mayer McKinney, Dean Carignan, and Eric Horvitz. 2023. Capabilities of gpt-4 on medical challenge problems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.13375 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Benedict U Nwachukwu, Nathan H Varady, Answorth A Allen, Joshua S Dines, David W Altchek, Riley J Williams III, and Kyle N Kunze

  66. [74]

    Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery (2024)

    Currently available large language models do not provide musculoskeletal treatment recommendations that are concordant with evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery (2024)

    2024

  67. [75]

    Rónán O’Caoimh, Nicola Cornally, Elizabeth Weathers, Ronan O’Sullivan, Carol Fitzgerald, Francesc Orfila, Roger Clarnette, Constança Paúl, and D William Molloy. 2015. Risk prediction in the community: A systematic review of case-finding instruments that predict adverse healthc...

    2015

  68. [76]

    Batyrkhan Omarov, Sergazi Narynov, Zhandos Zhumanov, Elmira Alzhanova, Aidana Gumar, and Mariyam Khassanova. 2022. Artificial Intelligence Enabled Conversational Agent for Mental Healthcare. International journal of health sciences 6, 3 (Oct. 2022), 1544–1555. https://doi.org/...

    2022 doi

  69. [77]

    OpenAI. 2022. Introducing chatgpt. https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt

    2022

  70. [78]

    OpenAI. 2023. GPT-4. https://openai.com/index/gpt-4/ Accessed: 2025-01-18

    2023

  71. [79]

    OpenAI. 2023. GPT-4 Technical Report. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.08774 arXiv:2303.08774 [cs]

    2023 doi arXiv

  72. [80]

    Valeria Pannunzio, Hosana Cristina Morales Ornelas, Pema Gurung, Robert van Kooten, Dirk Snelders, Hendrikus van Os, Michel Wouters, Rob Tollenaar, Douwe Atsma, and Maaike Kleinsmann. 2024. Patient and Staff Experience of Remote Patient Monitoring—What to Measure and How: Syst...

    2024

  73. [81]

    Alejandro Porras-Segovia, Rosa María Molina-Madueño, Sofian Berrouiguet, Jorge López-Castroman, Maria Luisa Barrigón, María San- dra Pérez-Rodríguez, José Heliodoro Marco, Isaac Díaz-Oliván, Santiago de León, Philippe Courtet, Antonio Artés-Rodríguez, and Enrique Baca-García. ...

    2020 doi

  74. [82]

    Niroop Channa Rajashekar, Yeo Eun Shin, Yuan Pu, Sunny Chung, Kisung You, Mauro Giuffre, Colleen E Chan, Theo Saarinen, Allen Hsiao, Jasjeet Sekhon, et al. 2024. Human-Algorithmic Interaction Using a Large Language Model-Augmented Artificial Intelligence Clinical Decision Supp...

    2024

  75. [83]

    Liz Salmi, Dana M Lewis, Jennifer L Clarke, Zhiyong Dong, Rudy Fischmann, Emily I McIntosh, Chethan R Sarabu, and Catherine M DesRoches. [n. d.]. Harnessing AI for Patient Engagement in a Study on Large Language Models and Open Notes. ([n. d.])

  76. [84]

    Semple, Sarah Sharpe, M

    John L. Semple, Sarah Sharpe, M. Lucas Murnaghan, John Theodoropoulos, and Kelly A. Metcalfe. 2015. Using a Mobile App for Monitoring Post-Operative Quality of Recovery of Patients at Home: A Feasibility Study. JMIR mHealth and uHealth 3, 1 (Feb. 2015), e3929. https://doi.org/...

    2015 doi

  77. [85]

    Hua Shen, Chieh-Yang Huang, Tongshuang Wu, and Ting-Hao’Kenneth’ Huang. 2023. ConvXAI: Delivering Heterogeneous AI Explanations via Conversations to Support Human-AI Scientific Writing. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.09770 (2023)

    2023

  78. [86]

    Karine De Almeida Silva, Arenamoline Xavier Duarte, Amanda Rodrigues Cruz, Letícia Oliveira Cardoso, Thatty Christina Morais Santos, and Geórgia Das Graças Pena. 2020. Ostomy time and nutrition status were associated on quality of life in patients with colorectal cancer. Journ...

    2020 doi

  79. [87]

    Karan Singhal, Shekoofeh Azizi, Tao Tu, S. Sara Mahdavi, Jason Wei, Hyung Won Chung, Nathan Scales, Ajay Tanwani, Heather Cole-Lewis, Stephen Pfohl, Perry Payne, Martin Seneviratne, Paul Gamble, Chris Kelly, Abubakr Babiker, Nathanael Schärli, Aakanksha Chowdhery, Philip Mansf...

    2023

  80. [88]

    Helen Smith. 2021. Clinical AI: opacity, accountability, responsibility and liability. Ai & Society 36, 2 (2021), 535–545

    2021

  81. [89]

    Stephanie Staras, Justin S Tauscher, Natalie Rich, Esaa Samarah, Lindsay A Thompson, Michelle M Vinson, Michael J Muszynski, Elizabeth A Shenkman, et al. 2021. Using a clinical workflow analysis to enhance eHealth implementation planning: tutorial and case study. JMIR mHealth ...

    2021

  82. [90]

    Glenn Steele Jr. 1993. Standard postoperative monitoring of patients after primary resection of colon and rectum cancer. Cancer 71, S12 (1993), 4225–4235

    1993

  83. [91]

    Claire Temple-Oberle, Spencer Yakaback, Carmen Webb, Golpira Elmi Assadzadeh, and Gregg Nelson. 2023. Effect of smartphone app postoperative home monitoring after oncologic surgery on quality of recovery: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA surgery 158, 7 (2023), 693–699

    2023

  84. [92]

    Hugo Touvron, Louis Martin, Kevin Stone, Peter Albert, Amjad Almahairi, Yasmine Babaei, Nikolay Bashlykov, Soumya Batra, Prajjwal Bhargava, Shruti Bhosale, Dan Bikel, Lukas Blecher, Cristian Canton Ferrer, Moya Chen, Guillem Cucurull, David Esiobu, Jude Fernandes, Jeremy Fu, W...

    2023 arXiv

  85. [93]

    Mm-hm, ”“Uh- uh

    Brian D Tran, Kareem Latif, Tera L Reynolds, Jihyun Park, Jennifer Elston Lafata, Ming Tai-Seale, and Kai Zheng. 2023. “Mm-hm, ”“Uh- uh”: are non-lexical conversational sounds deal breakers for the ambient clinical documentation technology? Journal of the American Medical Info...

    2023

  86. [94]

    Satvik Tripathi, Rithvik Sukumaran, and Tessa S Cook. 2024. Efficient healthcare with large language models: optimizing clinical workflow and enhancing patient care. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 31, 6 (2024), 1436–1440

    2024

  87. [95]

    van Kooten, Renu R

    Robert T. van Kooten, Renu R. Bahadoer, Koen C. M. J. Peeters, Jetty H. L. Hoeksema, Ewout W. Steyerberg, Henk H. Hartgrink, Cornelis J. H. van de Velde, Michel W. J. M. Wouters, and Rob A. E. M. Tollenaar. 2021. Preoperative Risk Factors for Major Postoperative Complications ...

    2021 doi

  88. [96]

    Brilliant AI Doctor

    Dakuo Wang, Liuping Wang, Zhan Zhang, Ding Wang, Haiyi Zhu, Yvonne Gao, Xiangmin Fan, and Feng Tian. 2021. "Brilliant AI Doctor" in Rural China: Tensions and Challenges in AI-Powered CDSS Deployment. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Syste...

    2021

  89. [97]

    Xinru Wang, Hannah Kim, Sajjadur Rahman, Kushan Mitra, and Zhengjie Miao. 2024. Human-LLM collaborative annotation through effective verification of LLM labels. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . 1–21

    2024

  90. [98]

    Jing Wei, Sungdong Kim, Hyunhoon Jung, and Young-Ho Kim. 2023. Leveraging Large Language Models to Power Chatbots for Collecting User Self-Reported Data

    2023

  91. [99]

    Jason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma, Fei Xia, Ed Chi, Quoc V Le, Denny Zhou, et al. 2022. Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models. Advances in neural information processing systems 35 (2022), 24824–24837

    2022

  92. [100]

    Joel Wester, Bhakti Moghe, Katie Winkle, and Niels van Berkel. 2024. Facing LLMs: Robot Communication Styles in Mediating Health Information between Parents and Young Adults. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 8, CSCW2 (2024), 1–37

    2024

  93. [101]

    Martin C. S. Wong, Junjie Huang, Paul S. F. Chan, Peter Choi, Xiang Qian Lao, Shannon Melissa Chan, Anthony Teoh, and Peter Liang. 2021. Global Incidence and Mortality of Gastric Cancer, 1980-2018. JAMA Network Open 4, 7 (July 2021), e2118457. https: //doi.org/10.1001/jamanetw...

    2021 doi

  94. [102]

    Ziang Xiao, Xingdi Yuan, Q Vera Liao, Rania Abdelghani, and Pierre-Yves Oudeyer. 2023. Supporting Qualitative Analysis with Large Language Models: Combining Codebook with GPT-3 for Deductive Coding. In Companion Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Intelligent U...

    2023

  95. [103]

    Ziang Xiao, Michelle X Zhou, Q Vera Liao, Gloria Mark, Changyan Chi, Wenxi Chen, and Huahai Yang. 2020. Tell me about yourself: Using an AI-powered chatbot to conduct conversational surveys with open-ended questions. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 27, 3...

    2020

  96. [104]

    Enhanced Recovery after Surgery

    Yukinori Yamagata, Takaki Yoshikawa, Masahiro Yura, Sho Otsuki, Shinji Morita, Hitoshi Katai, and Toshiro Nishida. 2019. Current Status of the “Enhanced Recovery after Surgery” Program in Gastric Cancer Surgery. Annals of Gastroenterological Surgery 3, 3 (2019), 231–238. https...

    2019 doi

  97. [105]

    I Wish There Were an AI

    Ziqi Yang, Xuhai Xu, Bingsheng Yao, Jiachen Li, Jennifer Bagdasarian, Guodong Gao, and Dakuo Wang. 2024. "I Wish There Were an AI": Challenges and AI Potential in Cancer Patient-Provider Communication. arXiv:2404.13409 [cs]

    2024

  98. [106]

    Ziqi Yang, Xuhai Xu, Bingsheng Yao, Shao Zhang, Ethan Rogers, Stephen Intille, Nawar Shara, Dakuo Wang, et al. 2023. Talk2Care: Facilitating Asynchronous Patient-Provider Communication with Large-Language-Model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.09357 (2023)

    2023

  99. [107]

    H Yasunaga, H Horiguchi, S Matsuda, K Fushimi, H Hashimoto, and J Z Ayanian. 2013. Body Mass Index and Outcomes Following Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery in Japan. British Journal of Surgery 100, 10 (Sept. 2013), 1335–1343. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.9221

    2013 doi

  100. [108]

    Wetscherek, Junaid Bajwa, Joseph Jacob, Mark A

    Nur Yildirim, Hannah Richardson, Maria T. Wetscherek, Junaid Bajwa, Joseph Jacob, Mark A. Pinnock, Stephen Harris, Daniel Coelho de Castro, Shruthi Bannur, Stephanie L. Hyland, Pratik Ghosh, Mercy Ranjit, Kenza Bouzid, Anton Schwaighofer, Fernando Pérez-García, Harshita Sharma...

    2024 doi

  101. [109]

    Li Yunxiang, Li Zihan, Zhang Kai, Dan Ruilong, and Zhang You. 2023. Chatdoctor: A medical chat model fine-tuned on llama model using medical domain knowledge. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.14070 (2023)

    2023

  102. [110]

    surgery recover

    Shao Zhang, Jianing Yu, Xuhai Xu, Changchang Yin, Yuxuan Lu, Bingsheng Yao, Melanie Tory, Lace M. Padilla, Jeffrey Caterino, Ping Zhang, and Dakuo Wang. 2024. Rethinking Human-AI Collaboration in Complex Medical Decision Making: A Case Study in Sepsis Diagnosis. https://doi.or...

    2024 doi

  103. [111]

    I am sorry that you have this pain

    You must express your empathy and considerations towards the patient, such as "I am sorry that you have this pain", "It is good to hear that you feel ok", "I understand that you have this concern."

  104. [112]

    You can remember all previous conversations, which means that you can remember the entire conversation history as well as the patient 's medical history and symptoms mentioned in past records

  105. [113]

    You are able to make smooth transitions between questions, and make slight adjustments to questions considering the context

    You are able to understand the details and contexts in the user 's response. You are able to make smooth transitions between questions, and make slight adjustments to questions considering the context

  106. [114]

    Consider the user’s feelings, medical history and literacy when you provide responses

    Please be very thoughtful. Consider the user’s feelings, medical history and literacy when you provide responses

  107. [115]

    You will ask questions according th the <Task Definition>

    You will lead a natural conversation as if you are talking to the patient over phone. You will ask questions according th the <Task Definition>

  108. [116]

    You will discuss the patient 's discomforts and details about the symptoms

  109. [117]

    You can only see messasge from today 's previous conversation

    You will be talking with the patient daily. You can only see messasge from today 's previous conversation. **ALL MESSAGES HAPPENES IN THE SAME DAY**. ## <Things that you must not do>

  110. [118]

    some symptoms may or may not be a problem)

    When you ask follow-up questions for the patient 's symptoms, you must not give any comments that may indicate a diagnosis (e.g. some symptoms may or may not be a problem). , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication date: February 2023. 40 • Yang et al. Here are some bad examples:...

    2023

  111. [119]

    Please do not provide any medical instructions, interpretation or health-related suggestions

  112. [120]

    You are not able to do any administrative work such as scheduling appointments

  113. [121]

    Please contact your healthcare providers as instructed for your questions

    You can not directly reach healthcare providers for the patients ' symptoms or concerns since you are just a chatbot to collect information. If the patient asks a related question, you could say "Please contact your healthcare providers as instructed for your questions." Simil...

  114. [122]

    Are you having difficulty breathing?

    Breathing (Difficulty Breathing) - "Are you having difficulty breathing?" - If "yes", first ask, "Tell me about your shortness of breath." - Then, inquire about the severity: "On a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the most difficult, how would you rate your shortness of breath?"

  115. [123]

    Are you having a fever of over 100 degrees or chills?

    Fever (Fever) - "Are you having a fever of over 100 degrees or chills?" - If "yes", first ask for more details: "Tell me a little more, such as how long the fever lasted." - Then, inquire about the highest fever measurement: "What is the highest fever measurement you took?"

  116. [124]

    Have you had black, tar-like stools?

    Stools (Black, Tar-like Stools) - "Have you had black, tar-like stools?" - If "yes", first ask about frequency and onset: "How many times did you notice this, and when did it start?"

  117. [125]

    Do you have pain that sharply increases, or becomes unbearable?

    Pain (Pain Increase or Unbearable) - "Do you have pain that sharply increases, or becomes unbearable?" - If "yes", first show empathy: "I 'm sorry you are having pain. Tell me more about when it started." - Then, check medication: "Are you taking more pain medication prescribe...

    2023

  118. [126]

    Are you having any wound drainage problems, such as redness around your wound, bleeding from the wound, pus, or an opening at the incision site?

    Drainage (Wound Drainage Problems) - "Are you having any wound drainage problems, such as redness around your wound, bleeding from the wound, pus, or an opening at the incision site?" - If "yes", ask for specifics: "Can you tell me more about this? For example, is this a small...

  119. [127]

    Do you have a decrease in your ability to perform your daily activities, such as not being able to walk to the bathroom?

    Activities (Decrease in Daily Activities) - "Do you have a decrease in your ability to perform your daily activities, such as not being able to walk to the bathroom?" - If "yes", first ask for more details about the decrease: "Tell me more about this decrease and how it is aff...

  120. [128]

    Have you had a decrease in your level of consciousness?

    Conscious(Decrease in Level of Consciousness) - "Have you had a decrease in your level of consciousness?" - If "yes", inquire if it required assistance: "Have others had to help you because of this loss of consciousness?" - Then, inquire about the severity: "On a scale of 1 to...

  121. [129]

    Have you had persistent constipation, nausea, or vomiting?

    Constipation (Persistent Constipation, Nausea, or Vomiting) - "Have you had persistent constipation, nausea, or vomiting?" - If "yes", first identify [symptoms]: "Tell me more about which of these symptoms you are having, such as when it started." - Then, assess [symptom] seve...

  122. [130]

    Have you had persistent diarrhea?

    Diarrhea (Persistent Diarrhea) - "Have you had persistent diarrhea?" - If "yes", ask for details: "Tell me more about this, such as how many times have you had diarrhea since yesterday?" - Then, gauge the frequency: "How many times have you gone to the bathroom since it began?"

  123. [131]

    Have you been unable to tolerate food or drink?

    Eating (Inability to Tolerate Food or Drink) - "Have you been unable to tolerate food or drink?" - If "yes", assess tolerance levels separately: "On a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the most **difficult**, how well are you able to tolerate food?" and then, "On a scale of 1 to...

  124. [132]

    Do you have unexplained or new pain or swelling in one of both of your legs?

    Swelling(Pain or swelling in legs) , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication date: February 2023. 42 • Yang et al. - "Do you have unexplained or new pain or swelling in one of both of your legs?" - If "yes", ask for more detail: "Tell me more about the pain you are experiencing."

    2023

  125. [133]

    Have you been feeling down or depressed?

    Mood (Feeling Down or Depressed) - "Have you been feeling down or depressed?" - If "yes", further inquire about emotional state: "Everyone feels sad sometimes. Have you been feeling continuously sad, or have you lost interest in most of your usual activities?" - Based on their...

  126. [134]

    Is there anything else you 'd like to comment on that I haven 't asked about?

    Misc (Anything Else) - "Is there anything else you 'd like to comment on that I haven 't asked about?" - If "Yes", ask follow-up questions like "Can you tell me more about [symptom]?", but be creative. Ask context-related questions to the symptom reported. # [Conversation Task...

  127. [135]

    Hello, this is the RECOVER research study chatbot assistant developed by Northeastern University HAI lab. Are you ready to start today 's questions?

    After the questions, you will finish the conversation in Section 3. Do not ask repetitive questions, and move to the next section naturally. All the quotes are just examples of the question - You do not need ask the questions exactly as the example; instead, consider the conte...

    2023

  128. [136]

    the patient has **explicitly** answered no to this key aspect

  129. [137]

    the patient has **explicitly** mentioned that they do not have the symptom of this aspect somewhere in the conversation

  130. [138]

    how are you feeling today

    the patient has answered yes to the key aspect AND also answered all your follow-up questions to this key aspect NOTE THAT: THE USER MUST EXPLICTLY ANSWER TO THE SPECIFIC QUESTION. ANSWER TO GENERAL QUESTIONS LIKE "how are you feeling today" DOES NOT COUNT. You must then check...

    2023

  131. [139]

    #### Section 2 Step 2

    Output the status of each question, according to "#### Section 2 Step 2". Example: breathing: not discussed fever: not discussed stools: not discussed pain: not discussed drainage: not discussed activity: not discussed conscious: not discussed constipation: not discussed diarr...

  132. [140]

    A delimiter `==============`

  133. [141]

    Difficulty Breathing

    The content you should say to the patient. It should either be a question, or a clarification to patient 's question. ### <Example scenario> You have greeted the patient and asked the first three questions in the list, and the patient has just mentioned a pain around the surgi...

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed May 23, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.