Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34199393›Full record

ArticleBrain sciences2021

A Survey on Socially Assistive Robotics: Clinicians' and Patients' Perception of a Social Robot within Gait Rehabilitation Therapies.

Denniss Raigoso, Nathalia Céspedes, Carlos A Cifuentes, Antonio J Del-Ama, Marcela Múnera

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Enhancing trust in healthcare robotics: implications derived from medical professionals' perspectives.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Denniss RaigosoDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Colombian School of Engineering Julio Garavito, Bogota 111166, Colombia.ORCID 0000-0002-7781-4729
Nathalia CéspedesCentre for Advanced Robotics at Queen Mary University of London, Mile End Rd, Bethnal Green, London E1 4NS, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9449-0885
Carlos A CifuentesDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Colombian School of Engineering Julio Garavito, Bogota 111166, Colombia.ORCID 0000-0002-6942-865X
Antonio J Del-AmaElectronic Technology department, Rey Juan Carlos University, 28933 Móstoles, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-6215-2593
Marcela MúneraDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Colombian School of Engineering Julio Garavito, Bogota 111166, Colombia.ORCID 0000-0001-6595-5383

Funding

Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación (Minciencias, Colombia) 801-2017
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A growing interest in Socially Assistive Robotics in Physical Rehabilitation is currently observed; some of the benefits highlight the capability of a social robot to support and assist rehabilitation procedures. This paper presents a perception study that aimed to evaluate clinicians' and patients' perception of a social robot that will be integrated as part of Lokomat therapy. A total of 88 participants were surveyed, employing an online questionnaire based on the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT). The participants belong to two health care institutions located in different countries (Colombia and Spain). The results showed an overall positive perception of the social robot (>60% of participants have a positive acceptance). Furthermore, a difference depending on the nature of the user (clinician vs. patient) was found.

Indexed as

gait rehabilitationlokomatperceptionphysical rehabilitationsocial robots

Identifiers

PMID34199393
PMCPMC8229546

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.