Skip to content

AI-Caregiving and AI-Health Research (arXiv, 2022–2025) — consolidated

A consolidated reference to fourteen arXiv preprints captured 2022–2025 that shape the AI-caregiving and AI-health research landscape GiveCare operates in. Preprints are not peer-reviewed, and the summaries below stay at the level of claim and scope. None is used as a stand-alone authority; together they document the research context for how LLMs, HCI, and agentic systems are being applied to caregiving, mental health, and aging.

AI chatbots, empathy, and mental health

Almakinah et al. (2024) — Secure and Empathetic AI-Enabled Chatbots for Mental Health

Enhancing Mental Health Support through Human-AI Collaboration. arXiv 2410.02783 (cs.CY). Almakinah R, Norcini-Pala A, Disney L, Canbaz MA. University at Albany SUNY.

  • Evaluates GPT-4, Mistral Large, and Llama 3.1 on empathetic mental-health responses; finds structured responses are achievable but the models fall short on emotional depth and adaptability of human therapists.
  • Proposes a federated learning framework with continuous clinician validation to enhance response quality, reduce bias, and preserve privacy.
  • Supports the wiki's argument that empathetic caregiver support requires human-AI collaboration rather than standalone "AI therapist" deployment.

Wasenmüller, Hilbert, Benzmüller (2024) — Script-Based Dialog Policy for AI Therapist

Script-Based Dialog Policy Planning for LLM-Powered Conversational Agents: A Basic Architecture for an "AI Therapist". arXiv 2412.15242 (cs.CL).

  • Defines five key requirements for an AI Therapist agent and proposes a script + state machine architecture that makes decision paths inspectable for risk management and clinical evaluation.
  • Argues that standalone LLM agents cannot satisfy therapeutic-risk requirements without structured dialog policy.
  • Directly relevant to GiveCare's skill-gated tool architecture and to the InvisibleBench multi-turn safety framing.

Huang et al. (2025) — AI-Augmented LLMs in Motivational Interviewing

AI-Augmented LLMs Achieve Therapist-Level Responses in Motivational Interviewing. arXiv 2505.17380.

  • Builds a computational framework assessing user-perceived quality (UPQ) through expected and unexpected MI behaviors.
  • Customized chain-of-thought prompting improved GPT-4's MI performance (reducing inappropriate advice, enhancing reflections and empathy). GPT-4 remained marginally inferior to human therapists overall but showed superior advice-management.
  • Supports the broader claim that prompt engineering and behavioral-metric analysis can move AI systems into therapist-adjacent quality ranges — relevant to how Mira's MI-aligned voice is designed and evaluated.

AI in caregiving and aging contexts

Stegner and Mutlu (2022) — Designing for Caregiving: Robotic Assistance in Senior Living

Designing for Caregiving. arXiv 2205.09032 (cs.RO). University of Wisconsin–Madison.

  • Field-based design research on how robotic assistance integrates into senior-living caregiving workflows.
  • Reinforces the broader pattern that caregiver-support technology must be designed with caregivers, not for them.

Kiafar et al. (2024) — Nursing Assistant Attitudes Toward Empathic Geriatric Caregiving

Analyzing Nursing Assistant Attitudes Towards Empathic Geriatric Caregiving. arXiv 2405.08948 (cs.HC).

  • Quantitative ethnography of CNA attitudes toward empathic care in geriatric settings, providing a grounded view of frontline caregiver experience relevant to how caregiver-facing tools should talk about empathy.

Rouzbahani and Karimipour (2024) — AI for Autistic Children's Caregivers

Application of Artificial Intelligence in Supporting Healthcare Professionals and Caregivers in Treatment of Autistic Children. arXiv 2407.08902.

  • Survey of AI applications in autism caregiving, including diagnostic support, behavior tracking, and caregiver guidance.

Kong, Huang, Gautam (2024) — AI for Personalized Cancer Care

Envisioning Possibilities and Challenges of AI for Personalized Cancer Care. arXiv 2408.10108 (cs.HC). University of Pittsburgh.

  • Notes that as many as half of all cancer survivors experience mental-health strain, and examines how AI could personalize cancer care for patients and caregivers.

Akter, Kropczynski, Lipford, Wisniewski (2024) — Caregiving Roles and Privacy-Security Apps

Examining Caregiving Roles to Differentiate the Effects of Using a Mobile App for Community Oversight for Privacy and Security. arXiv 2409.02364.

  • 4-week field study with 101 smartphone users. Finds people trust privacy advice from their trusted circles (friends and family) — relevant to how caregivers actually adopt and evaluate privacy-sensitive tools.

Florez-Revuelta et al. (2024) — 50 Questions on Active Assisted Living Technologies

50 questions on Active Assisted Living technologies (Global edition). arXiv 2410.16733.

  • Structured Q&A reference on Active Assisted Living tech — smart home, sensors, monitoring — for aging populations.

Gangavarapu and Gangavarapu (2024) — IMAS: Agentic Rural Healthcare

IMAS: A Comprehensive Agentic Approach to Rural Healthcare Delivery. arXiv 2410.12868. uheal.ai / Ethriva.

  • Proposes a multi-agent architecture for rural healthcare delivery; acknowledges that rural communities have faced widening gaps since COVID-19.

Ma et al. (2025) — HCI for Dementia Care Scoping Review

State-of-the-Art HCI for Dementia Care: A Scoping Review of Recent Technological Advances. arXiv 2505.04184 (cs.HC). University of Bergen.

  • Scoping review of 32 recent publications, categorized into four domains: Assistive and Smart Technology, Social Interaction and Communication, Well-being and Psychological Support, and Caregiver Support and Training.
  • Identifies critical gaps in support for early-stage dementia and the lack of individualized mechanisms — the same gaps GiveCare's condition page on conditions/dementia.md addresses through personalization rather than one-size-fits-all content.

Foundational AI, HCI, and philosophy of mind

Rupp and Behal (2022) — Cyber Human Interaction

Cyber Human Interaction. arXiv 2202.09307. UC Riverside / University of Central Florida.

  • Conceptual overview of cyber-human interaction for the Encyclopedia of Complexity and Systems Science, useful as background on how human factors research frames human–machine collaborative systems.

Nori et al. (2023) — Can Generalist Foundation Models Outcompete Special-Purpose Tuning in Medicine?

Can Generalist Foundation Models Outcompete Special-Purpose Tuning? Case Study in Medicine. arXiv 2311.16452 (cs.CL). Microsoft Research.

  • Landmark Microsoft Research paper documenting that generalist foundation models with careful prompting can match or outperform special-purpose medical models on medical reasoning benchmarks.
  • Supports the architectural claim that caregiver-facing products can be built on general-purpose LLMs with appropriate prompting and scaffolding, without requiring fine-tuned medical models.

Shanahan (2025) — Palatable Conceptions of Disembodied Being

Palatable Conceptions of Disembodied Being: Terra Incognita in the Space of Possible Minds. arXiv 2503.16348 (v2). Imperial College London / Institute of Philosophy, University of London. March 2025.

  • Philosophical paper on how we should conceptualize AI minds — disembodied, non-continuous, non-biographical — without falling into either over-anthropomorphic or reductively mechanical framings.
  • Relevant to Mira's identity framing, which deliberately avoids both the "just a chatbot" reduction and the artificial-intimacy over-personification that Turkle critiques.

Why this collection matters for the wiki

  • Documents the active AI-caregiving research landscape that GiveCare operates in — HCI for dementia, AI for cancer and autism, AI chatbots for mental health, rural agentic healthcare, AAL technologies, motivational interviewing.
  • Supports several positioning claims:
  • Caregiver-facing AI is a real, active research area (not speculative) — multiple university groups, multiple countries, multiple methodologies.
  • The empathy / safety / inspectability requirements researchers are converging on are the same requirements GiveCare's design addresses (skill-gated tools, structured dialog, caregiver-centric allegiance, human-AI collaboration).
  • Generalist foundation models with careful design can reach clinical-adjacent quality — supporting the Mira-on-SMS architectural choice rather than fine-tuned medical-specific models.
  • Used as supporting rather than load-bearing citations; primary claims are anchored in peer-reviewed or institutional sources elsewhere in the wiki.