Researchers conducted a randomized clinical trial to see if a generative AI maternal health chatbot could help new mothers. The study included 400 English-speaking pregnant or postpartum individuals from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds. These parents were caring for infants younger than six months old.
After 12 months, the results showed no significant difference in anxiety or depression scores between the group that used the AI chatbot and the group that received monthly children's books. Other measures, such as emergency department visits, postpartum care checkups, and contraception use, also showed no significant differences between the two groups.
Some exploratory findings showed that higher engagement with the chatbot was linked to both longer sleep and higher anxiety scores. However, these specific results should be viewed with caution as they were not part of the primary study goals. Currently, there is no evidence that an AI chatbot is more effective than traditional materials for managing maternal mental health.
Common questions
Does an AI chatbot help with postpartum anxiety?
The study found no significant difference in anxiety scores between mothers who used a generative AI chatbot and those who received children's books. While some higher engagement with the chatbot was linked to higher anxiety scores in an exploratory analysis, the primary results showed no overall improvement in mental health symptoms over 12 months.
Who was included in this study?
The study included 400 English-speaking pregnant or postpartum individuals. These participants were from racial and ethnic minoritized groups and were caring for infants younger than 6 months old. The study took place online across 49 states and the District of Columbia.
Were there any other benefits found from using the AI chatbot?
The study found no significant differences in emergency department visits, postpartum care checkups, or contraception use. While an exploratory analysis showed a link between higher chatbot engagement and longer sleep, these findings should be interpreted cautiously as they were not the primary focus of the trial.