Background: Artificial intelligence–powered conversational agents (ie, chatbots) are increasingly popular outlets for users seeking psychological support, yet little is known about how users experience early-stage prototypes or which therapeutic processes contribute to clinical improvement. A transparent evaluation of emerging chatbot prototypes is needed to clarify if, how, and why artificial intelligence companions work and to guide their continued development. Objective: This mixed methods pilot study evaluated user experience, acceptability, and preliminary clinical signals for an early-stage mental wellness chatbot. We also examined whether baseline symptom severity moderated clinical improvement. Methods: Three sequential cohorts (n=125) completed a 2-week, incentivized chatbot exposure (approximately 60 min per week). Participants provided first-impression ratings, qualitative feedback, and pre–post assessments of depressive symptoms (PHQ-8 [Patient Health Questionnaire-8]), anxiety symptoms (GAD-7 [Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7]), psychological distress, well-being, and loneliness. Statistical models estimated symptom change and tested interactions with baseline symptom severity. Mixed methods analysis integrated quantitative outcomes with large language model–assisted qualitative content analysis of open-ended responses. Results: Participants described the chatbot as accessible, easy to use, and emotionally validating, while citing limitations in personalization and conversational depth. Qualitative responses consistently highlighted early therapeutic processes such as emotional validation, goal setting, and perceived attunement. Regression models showed significant pre–post reductions in depressive (Hedges =–0.32) and anxiety (=–0.32) symptoms, alongside modest improvements in distress and well-being. Baseline severity moderated improvement, with marginal effects indicating larger predicted reductions at higher PHQ-8 and GAD-7 baseline scores (eg, PHQ-8=15: =–0.84; GAD-7=15: =–0.62). Conclusions: This pilot provides a comprehensive view of early chatbot development and suggests promising user experiences and preliminary symptom improvements under structured pilot conditions. By integrating experiential and exploratory clinical data, the study identifies candidate process targets to inform ongoing refinement. Findings support continued development and demonstrate procedural feasibility for progression to larger, longer-term trials evaluating engagement and clinical outcomes under more naturalistic conditions.
<img src="https://jmir-production.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/thumbs/df551c8cc1fc34d8080828a3b50a6924" />
Development of Virtual Mental Health Stepped Care Service for a Heart Failure Remote Management Program: Qualitative Descriptive Study
Background: Depression is highly prevalent yet undertreated among people living with heart failure, indicating barriers to mental health services. Although various digital mental health interventions have been developed to detect, treat, and manage depression in this population, these interventions have seen limited integration into clinical care and a lack of implementation research. Stepped care is a service innovation that may promote the implementation of these technologies into clinical settings, but few studies have examined how these services are designed in clinical settings. Objective: This study aimed to identify strategies to address health system barriers to accessing mental health care from the perspective of people living with heart failure, clinicians, and researchers, and to incorporate these strategies into the design of a virtual mental health stepped care service within a heart failure remote management program. Methods: A qualitative description study was conducted using purposive recruitment of people living with heart failure, clinicians, and researchers from a heart failure remote patient management program. As part of a service design approach, semistructured interviews explored potential strategies to address barriers to accessing mental health services. Two researchers coded the data descriptively and constructed themes to guide the development of a virtual stepped care service. Results: A total of 22 participants were interviewed, comprising 13 people living with heart failure and 9 clinicians and researchers. Six themes were identified, comprising 4 requirements and 2 foundational principles. The requirements were to (1) adopt a collective approach to identify distress across methods, people, and time points; (2) maintain a referral-based approach; (3) rely on existing mental health human resources; and (4) offer patient choice among various mental health care options. These requirements were supported by two principles: (1) building on organizational strengths and (2) reducing treatment burden. Based on these findings, a virtual stepped care service was developed, incorporating a depression screening module, referral-based workflows, and, where clinically appropriate, patient choice in treatment selection. Conclusions: The stakeholder-informed design of this virtual stepped care service contributes to the limited literature on stepped care service design and demonstrates how such models can be tailored to their intended contexts. Although each component was designed to address health system barriers to mental health care for people living with heart failure, resource limitations may constrain the balance between feasibility and quality of care. Future research should evaluate the acceptability of this model among people living with heart failure and clinicians.
<img src="https://jmir-production.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/thumbs/55252764b80ef3ce085b4f3f728aad47" />
Prediction of Relapse Using Digital Technology in People in Recovery From Substance Use Disorders: Early Economic Evaluation With a Case Study of the Subreal App
The Download: the state of AI, and protecting bears with drones
This is today’s edition of The Download, our weekday newsletter that provides a daily dose of what’s going on in the world of technology.
Want to understand the current state of AI? Check out these charts.
If you’re following AI news, you’re probably getting whiplash. AI is a gold rush. AI is a bubble. AI is taking your job. AI can’t even read a clock. Stanford’s 2026 AI Index—the field’s annual report card—cuts through the noise.
The data reveals a technology evolving faster than we can manage. From the China-US rivalry and model breakthroughs to public sentiment and the impact on jobs, here are the index’s key findings on the state of AI today.
—Michelle Kim
Why opinion on AI is so divided
Stanford’s 2026 AI Index is full of striking stats. It also reveals a field riddled with inconsistencies, most notably in the gap between experts and non-experts.
On jobs, 73% of US experts view AI’s impact positively, compared to just 23% of the public. Similar divides emerged on the economy and healthcare. What’s driving this disconnect?
Part of the answer may lie in their diverging experiences. Those using AI for coding and technical work see it at its best, while everyone else gets a more mixed bag. The result is two very different realities. Read the full story on what they are—and why they matter.
This story is from The Algorithm, our weekly newsletter on AI. Sign up to receive it in your inbox every Monday.
—Will Douglas Heaven
Job titles of the future: Wildlife first responder
Grizzly bears have made such a comeback across eastern Montana that in 2017, the state hired its first-ever prairie-based grizzly manager: wildlife biologist Wesley Sarmento.
For seven years, Sarmento worked to keep both bears and humans out of trouble. He acted like a first responder, trying to defuse potentially dangerous situations. He even got caught in some himself, which led him to a new wildlife safety tool: drones. Find out the results of his experiments in digital ecology.
—Emily Senkosky
This article is from the next issue of our print magazine, which is all about nature. Subscribe now to read it when it lands on Wednesday, April 22.
The must-reads
I’ve combed the internet to find you today’s most fun/important/scary/fascinating stories about technology.
1 Human scientists still trounce the top AI agents at complex tasks
The best agents perform only half as well as experts with PhDs. (Nature)
+ Can AI really help us discover new materials? (MIT Technology Review)
2 OpenAI is escalating its fight with Anthropic while pulling away from Microsoft
A leaked memo exposes plans to attack Anthropic. (Axios)
+ And says Microsoft “limited our ability” to reach clients. (The Information $)
+ While touting a budding alliance with Amazon. (CNBC)
3 Carbon removal technology is stalling—and that may be good news
Better solutions could now emerge. (New Scientist)
+ Here are three that are set to break through. (MIT Technology Review)
4 AI is finding bugs faster than we can fix them—and hackers will benefit
Welcome to the bug armageddon. (WSJ $)
+ AI may soon be capable of fully automated attacks. (MIT Technology Review)
5 A Texas man has been charged with the attempted murder of Sam Altman
He allegedly threw a Molotov cocktail at the OpenAI CEO’s home last Friday. (NPR)
+ The suspect reportedly had a list of other AI leaders. (NYT $)
6 AI is beginning to transform mathematics
It’s proving new results at a rapid pace. (Quanta)
+ One AI startup plans to unearth new mathematical patterns. (MIT Technology Review)
7 Students are turning away from computer science
It’s had a massive drop in enrollments. (WP $)
+ AI coding tools have diminished the degree’s value. (NYT $)
8 India’s bid to become a data center hub is sparking a fierce backlash
Farmers are protesting Delhi’s courtship of hyperscalers. (Rest of World)
9 Meta is set to overtake Google in advertising revenue this year
And become the world’s largest digital ad platform for the first time. (WSJ)
10 AI influencers are taking over Coachella
Synthetic content creators are “everywhere” at the festival. (The Verge)
Quote of the day
“These people are almost nothing like you. They are most likely sociopathic/psychopathic and, in the case of Altman, consistently reported to be a pathological liar.”
—The alleged firebomber of Sam Altman’s home shares his distrust of AI leaders in a blog post.
One More Thing

We’ve never understood how hunger works. That might be about to change.
A few years ago, Brad Lowell, a Harvard University neuroscientist, figured out how to crank the food drive to the maximum. He did it by stimulating neurons in mice. Now, he’s following known parts of the neural hunger circuits into uncharted parts of the brain.
The work could have important implications for public health. More than 1.9 billion adults worldwide are overweight, and more than 650 million are obese. Understanding the circuits involved could shed new light on why these numbers are skyrocketing.
—Adam Piore
We can still have nice things
A place for comfort, fun and distraction to brighten up your day. (Got any ideas? Drop me a line.)
Top image credit: Stephanie Arnett/MIT Technology Review | Getty Images
+ Someone built a mechanical version of Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater from Lego.
+ Enjoy this wholesome clip of toddlers discovering the existence of hugs.
+ This interactive body map shows exactly which exercises you need.
+ Jon McCormack’s photos of nature’s patterns are breathtaking.

