Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34873425›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of social robotics2022

Positive Turn in Elder-Care Workers' Views Toward Telecare Robots.

Tuuli Turja, Sakari Taipale, Marketta Niemelä, Tomi Oinas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of social robotics, 2022. 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
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Uncertainties about accepting care robots.Frontiers in digital health · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

4 authors.

Tuuli TurjaFaculty of Social Sciences, Tampere University, Kalevantie 5, 33014 Tampere, Finland.ORCID 0000-0001-7815-9511
Sakari TaipaleUniversity of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland.ORCID 0000-0001-8962-6226
Marketta NiemeläVTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Tampere, Finland.
Tomi OinasUniversity of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland.ORCID 0000-0003-3250-5815

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Robots have been slowly but steadily introduced to welfare sectors. Our previous observations based on a large-scale survey study on Finnish elder-care workers in 2016 showed that while robots were perceived to be useful in certain telecare tasks, using robots may also prove to be incompatible with the care workers' personal values. The current study presents the second wave of the survey data from 2020, with the same respondents (N = 190), and shows how these views have changed for the positive, including higher expectations of telecare robotization and decreased concerns over care robots' compatibility with personal values. In a longitudinal analysis (Phase 1), the positive change in views toward telecare robots was found to be influenced by the care robots' higher value compatibility. In an additional cross-sectional analysis (Phase 2), focusing on the factors underlying personal values, care robots' value compatibility was associated with social norms toward care robots, the threat of technological unemployment, and COVID-19 stress. The significance of social norms in robot acceptance came down to more universal ethical standards of care work rather than shared norms in the workplace. COVID-19 stress did not explain the temporal changes in views about robot use in care but had a role in assessments of the compatibility between personal values and care robot use. In conclusion, for care workers to see potential in care robots, the new technology must support ethical standards of care work, such as respectfulness, compassion, and trustworthiness of the nurse-patient interaction. In robotizing care work, personal values are significant predictors of the task values.

Indexed as

Care robotsEthicsNurseRobot acceptanceValues

Identifiers

PMID34873425
PMCPMC8636069

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.