Loading
Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · October 30, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Patients often arrive at brief, time-constrained clinical visits unsure of what to expect or ask, and millions of adults now turn to general-purpose AI chatbots to prepare beforehand. Yet whether conversational AI improves visit readiness remains unclear. We designed a large language model (LLM)-based visit preparation agent to guide patients before an appointment by gathering clinical context, setting visit expectations, providing relevant health information, building a prioritized list of questions for their clinician, and generating a summary. In a prospective consented randomized study in the Google Health app, 802 U.S. adults held 866 health-related conversations with the visit preparation agent (standard or concise variant) or a minimally prompted control chatbot built on the same LLM. The visit preparation agent significantly outperformed the control across blinded clinician evaluations and patient self-reports. In clinician reviews of completed sessions (n = 272), the agent achieved a 16.6% higher rate of comprehensive preparation (67.2% vs. 50.6%; P < 0.05) and an 8.5% higher rate of alignment with patients' health context (98.9% vs. 90.4%; P < 0.01), while maintaining high medical safety and appropriateness across all study arms. Patient post-surveys (n = 460) showed 16.8% higher visit preparedness (73.8% vs. 57.0%; P < 0.01), 14.3% higher confidence in knowing what to ask (81.4% vs. 67.1%; P < 0.01), and 12.0% higher overall satisfaction (74.0% vs. 62.0%; P < 0.05). Clinician and participant metrics were not significantly correlated, indicating that expert review and patient self-assessment capture complementary dimensions of patient-facing AI. These findings suggest that LLM chatbots can safely help patients prepare for clinical visits, with greater benefit when following a structured workflow, and motivate future studies on in-visit communication and clinical outcomes.