ArticleJournal of child and family studies2021
Evaluating the Role of a Socially Assistive Robot in Children's Mental Health Care.
Article in Journal of child and family studies, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Care Robots as Emerging Health Technologies: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Embodied Intelligence Applications in Health Care Populations: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Can social robots improve the hospital experience of children?Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2026Article
- Pediatrics 4.0: the Transformative Impacts of the Latest Industrial Revolution on Pediatrics.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2025Article
- Compassionate Care with Autonomous AI Humanoid Robots in Future Healthcare Delivery: A Multisensory Simulation of Next-Generation Models.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Use of automated conversational agents in improving young population mental health: a scoping review.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Socially assistive robots (SARs) present a promising intervention for addressing the increasing prevalence of childhood stress. This innovative technology has become increasingly common in practical implementation. However, empirical support has not kept pace with the robots' growing popularity. The present study set out to provide an empirical test of the stress-buffering capability of this technology. We examined the effects of the presence of an SAR on self-reported measures of stress in a community sample of 70 children (40 girls, 30 boys) between the ages of 7 and 10 years old. Child participants were randomly assigned to either a robot-present or a robot-absent condition during the Trier Social Stress Test for Children. Contrary to our predictions, we did not detect a stress-buffering effect of the presence of the robot. Instead, the primary analysis showed that the robot's presence led to a larger decrease in positive affect following the task. However, further analyses found no significant difference in positive affect when accounting for baseline group differences. Exploratory analyses of the nature of children's interactions with the SAR during the stressful task found that higher levels of parent-reported social anxiety were associated with greater prosocial behaviors towards the SAR, thus signifying a potential target for future interventions. Further work on SARs is needed to determine the optimal timing and robotic specifications that would maximize the potential of this developing technology to improve children's mental health care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.