Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38033146›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2023

Ageing society and the challenge for social robotics: A systematic review of Socially Assistive Robotics for MCI patients.

Giusi Figliano, Federico Manzi, Andrea Luna Tacci, Antonella Marchetti, Davide Massaro

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
13.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Artificial Intelligence and Assistive Robotics in Healthcare Services: Applications in Silver Care.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Review
  8. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Giusi FiglianoDepartment of Psychology, Research Unit on Theory of Mind, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-0566-7050
Federico ManziDepartment of Psychology, Research Unit on Theory of Mind, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milan, Italy.
Andrea Luna TacciDepartment of Psychology, Research Unit on Theory of Mind, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milan, Italy.
Antonella MarchettiDepartment of Psychology, Research Unit on Theory of Mind, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milan, Italy.
Davide MassaroDepartment of Psychology, Research Unit on Theory of Mind, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milan, Italy.
Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aging population in Western countries has led to a rise in predementia conditions like Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI). Social Assistive Robotics (SAR) interventions, among novel technological tools, offer a promising interdisciplinary approach to mitigate cognitive and social symptoms' progression in this clinical group. This systematic review aims to identify existing clinical protocols employing social robots for treating cognitive and social cognition skills in individuals with MCI. The review protocol adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. From six databases, we retrieved and analyzed 193 articles, of which 19 met the inclusion criteria, featuring samples diagnosed with MCI and subjected to cognitive and/or social interventions through SAR. The review encompasses both qualitative and quantitative studies, with a focus on assessing bias risk. Articles were categorized into four primary areas: study participants' samples, types of robots and programming used, assessment of cognitive abilities, and the nature of interventions (i.e., cognitive and and social cognition skills). While the findings highlight the potential benefits of using SAR for MCI interventions in both cognitive and social cognition domains, the studies primarily emphasized robot acceptability rather than intervention outcomes. Methodological limitations such as clinical heterogeneity, absence of control groups, and non-standardized assessments restrict the generalizability of these findings. This review underscores the promising role of Social Assistive Robotics in MCI interventions, emphasizing the importance of social cognition skills interventions and advocating for increased collaboration between clinicians and robotic researchers to overcome current limitations and enhance future outcomes.

Indexed as

Cognitive DysfunctionAgedAgingCognitionHumansSocial Skills

Identifiers

PMID38033146
PMCPMC10688856
OpenAlexW4389165375

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.