Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30951515›Full record

ReviewThe Clinical journal of pain2019

Socially Assistive Robots for Helping Pediatric Distress and Pain: A Review of Current Evidence and Recommendations for Future Research and Practice.

Margaret J Trost, Adam R Ford, Lynn Kysh, Jeffrey I Gold, Maja Matarić

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Clinical journal of pain, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
8.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Pediatrics 4.0: the Transformative Impacts of the Latest Industrial Revolution on Pediatrics.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Margaret J TrostDepartments of Anesthesiology, Pediatrics, and Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, University of Southern California, Keck School of Medicine.
Adam R FordDepartments of Anesthesiology, Pediatrics, and Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, University of Southern California, Keck School of Medicine.
Lynn KyshDepartments of Anesthesiology, Pediatrics, and Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, University of Southern California, Keck School of Medicine.
Jeffrey I GoldDepartments of Anesthesiology, Pediatrics, and Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, University of Southern California, Keck School of Medicine.
Maja MatarićUniversity of Southern California, Viterbi School of Engineering, Los Angeles, CA.
University of Southern California · USChildren's Hospital of Los Angeles · US

Funding

Southern California Clinical and Translational Science InstituteUL1TR001855 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI Thomas A Buchanan, Michele D. Kipke · 2016 to 2026
$81.3M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001855
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesInteracting with socially assistive robots (SAR) has been shown to influence human behaviors and emotions. This study sought to review the literature on SAR intervention for reducing pediatric distress and pain in medical settings.

methodsDatabases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ERIC, Web of Science, Engineering Village, Scopus, Google Scholar, IEEE Xplore) were searched from database inception to January 2018 with the aid of a medical librarian. Included studies examined any SAR intervention for reducing pain or improving emotional well-being in children related to physical or psychiatric care, with outcomes assessed by some quantitative measure. Study quality was assessed using the modified Downs and Black checklist (max. score, 28). The review is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42016043018).

resultsEight studies met the eligibility criteria and represented 206 children. Of the 2 studies using Wong-Baker's FACES scale, 1 study claimed to be effective at reducing pain (Cohen d=0.49 to 0.62), while the other appeared effective only when parents and child interacted with SAR together. Distress was evaluated using validated measures in 4 studies, 3 of which showed reduction in distress while one showed no difference. Satisfaction surveys from 4 studies showed that children were interested in using SAR again. Quality scores ranged from 8 to 26.

conclusionsThere is limited evidence suggesting that SAR interventions may reduce distress and no clear evidence showing reduction in pain for children in medical settings. Engineers are conducting interventions using SAR in pediatric populations. Health care providers should be engaged in technology research related to children to facilitate testing and improve the effectiveness of these systems.

Indexed as

RoboticsAnxietyChildHumansPain

Identifiers

PMID30951515
PMCPMC6527453
OpenAlexW2920053100

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.