ArticleJMIR aging2024
Positive Emotional Responses to Socially Assistive Robots in People With Dementia: Pilot Study.
Article in JMIR aging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- "First, do no harm" in the digital era: examining the practicality of the European Health Data Space proposal and ethical implications of artificial intelligence: A systematic literature review.BMC medical ethics · 2026Pooled it
- Artificial intelligence-enabled social robots for facilitating social interactions in patients with dementia: a systematic review.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Pooled it
- Intelligent Robot Interventions for People With Dementia: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Effectiveness of Socially Assistive Robots in Promoting Positive Emotional Responses and Alleviating Postoperative Pain Among Children: Quantitative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Humanoid Robot-Assisted Support for Health Care in Older Adults: Systematic Scoping Review.JMIR aging · 2026Article
- Comparing Caregiver Perceptions of a Social Robot and Tablet for Serious Game Delivery in Dementia Care: Cross-Sectional Comparison Study.JMIR serious games · 2025Article
- Evaluating Social Assistive Robots in Clinical Nursing Care: Mixed Method Pilot Study on Health Care Workers' Perceptions and Adoption.JMIR nursing · 2025Article
- Transforming dementia caregiver support with AI-powered social robotics.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2025Article
- Longitudinal changes following the introduction of socially assistive robots in nursing homes: a qualitative study with ICF framework and causal loop diagramming.BMC geriatrics · 2024Article
- Establishing the Foundations of Emotional Intelligence in Care Companion Robots to Mitigate Agitation Among High-Risk Patients With Dementia: Protocol for an Empathetic Patient-Robot Interaction Study.JMIR research protocols · 2024Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Interventions and care that can evoke positive emotions and reduce apathy or agitation are important for people with dementia. In recent years, socially assistive robots used for better dementia care have been found to be feasible. However, the immediate responses of people with dementia when they are given multiple sensory modalities from socially assistive robots have not yet been sufficiently elucidated. Objective: This study aimed to quantitatively examine the immediate emotional responses of people with dementia to stimuli presented by socially assistive robots using facial expression analysis in order to determine whether they elicited positive emotions. Methods: This pilot study adopted a single-arm interventional design. Socially assistive robots were presented to nursing home residents in a three-step procedure: (1) the robot was placed in front of participants (visual stimulus), (2) the robot was manipulated to produce sound (visual and auditory stimuli), and (3) participants held the robot in their hands (visual, auditory, and tactile stimuli). Expression intensity values for "happy," "sad," "angry," "surprised," "scared," and "disgusted" were calculated continuously using facial expression analysis with FaceReader. Additionally, self-reported feelings were assessed using a 5-point Likert scale. In addition to the comparison between the subjective and objective emotional assessments, expression intensity values were compared across the aforementioned 3 stimuli patterns within each session. Finally, the expression intensity value for "happy" was compared between the different types of robots. Results: A total of 29 participants (mean age 88.7, SD 6.2 years; n=27 female; Japanese version of Mini-Mental State Examination mean score 18.2, SD 5.1) were recruited. The expression intensity value for "happy" was the largest in both the subjective and objective assessments and increased significantly when all sensory modalities (visual, auditory, and tactile) were presented (median expression intensity 0.21, IQR 0.09-0.35) compared to the other 2 patterns (visual alone: median expression intensity 0.10, IQR 0.03-0.22; P<.001; visual and auditory: median expression intensity 0.10, IQR 0.04-0.23; P<.001). The comparison of different types of robots revealed a significant increase when all stimuli were presented by doll-type and animal-type robots, but not humanoid-type robots. Conclusions: By quantifying the emotional responses of people with dementia, this study highlighted that socially assistive robots may be more effective in eliciting positive emotions when multiple sensory stimuli, including tactile stimuli, are involved. More studies, including randomized controlled trials, are required to further explore the effectiveness of using socially assistive robots in dementia 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.