Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35438639›Full record

ArticleJMIR mental health2022

Social Robot Interventions in Mental Health Care and Their Outcomes, Barriers, and Facilitators: Scoping Review.

Imane Guemghar, Paula Pires de Oliveira Padilha, Amal Abdel-Baki, Didier Jutras-Aswad, Jesseca Paquette, Marie-Pascale Pomey

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mental health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Care provided by humanoid robots: a scoping review.Investigacion y educacion en enfermeria · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Imane GuemgharCentre de Recherche du Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3558-618X
Paula Pires de Oliveira PadilhaCentre de Recherche du Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8792-7762
Amal Abdel-BakiCentre de Recherche du Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3333-9652
Didier Jutras-AswadCentre de Recherche du Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8474-508X
Jesseca PaquetteCentre de Recherche du Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0361-1440
Marie-Pascale PomeyCentre de Recherche du Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5180-8139

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of social robots as innovative therapeutic tools has been increasingly explored in recent years in an effort to address the growing need for alternative intervention modalities in mental health care.

objectiveThe aim of this scoping review was to identify and describe social robot interventions in mental health facilities and to highlight their outcomes as well as the barriers and facilitators to their implementation.

methodsA scoping review of the literature published since 2015 was conducted using the Arksey and O'Malley's framework. The MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and PsycINFO databases were searched, and 2239 papers were retrieved. The papers included were primary empirical studies published in peer-reviewed literature. Eligible studies were set in mental health facilities and they included participants with a known mental health disorder. The methodological quality of the included papers was also assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.

resultsA total of 30 papers met the eligibility criteria for this review. Studies involved participants with dementia, cognitive impairment, schizophrenia, depression, autism spectrum disorder, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, and an intellectual disability. The outcomes studied included engagement, social interaction, emotional state, agitation, behavior, and quality of life.

conclusionsThe methodological weaknesses of the studies conducted this far and the lack of diversity in the conditions studied limit the generalizability of the results. However, despite the presence of certain barriers to their implementation (eg, technical problems, unsuitable environment, staff resistance), social robot interventions generally show positive effects on patients with mental health disorders. Studies of stronger methodological quality are needed to further understand the benefits and the place of social robots in mental health care.

Indexed as

autism spectrum disorderdementiadepressionmental healthmental health servicesSARsschizophreniascoping reviewsocially assistive robotssocial robots

Identifiers

PMID35438639
PMCPMC9066335

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.