Tundra Space

Tundra Space

Clinical Research Directory

Browse clinical research sites, groups, and studies.

Back to Studies
NOT YET RECRUITING
NCT07105397
NA

Evaluating Conversational Artificial Intelligence for Depression Management

Sponsor: George Mason University

View on ClinicalTrials.gov

Summary

The goal of this clinical trial is to evaluate how a conversational method of collecting medical history affects patients' perceptions and experiences compared to clinical care as usual. This conversational AI intake system collects medical history information, can be completed by participants at home, and do not disrupt routine clinical care. The primary questions this study aims to answer are: 1\) Does conversational intake affect patients' perceptions of empathy during their clinical interactions? This will be a prospective study that follows a cohort of participants for four (4) months after engaging with the AI intake system. Because each participant serves as his/her own control, both comparators will be administered within-subject, and the order of exposure (AI intake vs. usual care) will be randomized to minimize sequence effects. After completing the AI intake method, participants will rate their experience, particularly in terms of empathy and compare it to their usual interactions with their own clinicians.

Key Details

Gender

All

Age Range

18 Years - 85 Years

Study Type

INTERVENTIONAL

Enrollment

130

Start Date

2026-04-15

Completion Date

2028-06-30

Last Updated

2026-04-09

Healthy Volunteers

No

Interventions

OTHER

Conversational AI system vs Usual Care

Participants complete medical history intake through an interactive conversational AI designed to support patient-centered, empathetic dialogue. Using large language models (LLM), the system interprets patient input, maintains context, and generates natural-language responses. A dialogue manager prioritizes medically relevant topics to support efficient data collection and reduce off-topic discussion. For safety, trained human monitors oversee conversations in real time and can intervene if risks such as self-harm arise. The AI intake is compared with patients' experiences with their clinicians through monthly follow-up questionnaires over four months. The study evaluates patients' ratings of empathy, communication quality, and engagement, not conversation content. Each participant serves as their own control, with AI intake and usual care compared within-subject and randomized by order of exposure.

Locations (1)

George Mason University

Fairfax, Virginia, United States