Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31250734›Full record

ArticlePalliative medicine2019

Robotic technology for palliative and supportive care: Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats.

Amara Callistus Nwosu, Bethany Sturgeon, Tamsin McGlinchey, Christian Dg Goodwin, Ardhendu Behera, Stephen Mason, Sarah Stanley, Terry R Payne

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Palliative medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Amara Callistus Nwosu1 Academic Palliative & End of Life Care Department, Royal Liverpool & Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0014-3741
Bethany Sturgeon4 Bristol Robotics Laboratory, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Tamsin McGlinchey2 Palliative Care Institute Liverpool (PCIL), University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Christian Dg Goodwin2 Palliative Care Institute Liverpool (PCIL), University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Ardhendu Behera6 Department of Computer Science, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, UK.
Stephen Mason2 Palliative Care Institute Liverpool (PCIL), University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Sarah Stanley3 Marie Curie Hospice Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Terry R Payne7 Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
University of Liverpool · GBEdge Hill University · GBMarie Curie Hospice · GBUniversity of Bristol · GB

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMedical robots are increasingly used for a variety of applications in healthcare. Robots have mainly been used to support surgical procedures, and for a variety of assistive uses in dementia and elderly care. To date, there has been limited debate about the potential opportunities and risks of robotics in other areas of palliative, supportive and end-of-life care.

aimThe objective of this article is to examine the possible future impact of medical robotics on palliative, supportive care and end-of-life care. Specifically, we will discuss the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) of this technology.

methodsA SWOT analysis to understand the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of robotic technology in palliative and supportive care.

resultsThe opportunities of robotics in palliative, supportive and end-of-life care include a number of assistive, therapeutic, social and educational uses. However, there are a number of technical, societal, economic and ethical factors which need to be considered to ensure meaningful use of this technology in palliative care.

conclusionRobotics could have a number of potential applications in palliative, supportive and end-of-life care. Future work should evaluate the health-related, economic, societal and ethical implications of using this technology. There is a need for collaborative research to establish use-cases and inform policy, to ensure the appropriate use (or non-use) of robots for people with serious illness.

Indexed as

Palliative CareRoboticsTerminal CareHospice CareHumansend-of-life carehealthcarepalliative careRoboticssupportive caretechnology

Identifiers

PMID31250734
PMCPMC6691596
OpenAlexW2954163737

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.