Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38745638›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of nursing studies advances2022

Nursing and human-computer interaction in healthcare robots for older people: An integrative review.

Michael Joseph S Dino, Patricia M Davidson, Kenneth W Dion, Sarah L Szanton, Irvin L Ong

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of nursing studies advances, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Virtual humans in geriatric care: an integrative review.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Michael Joseph S DinoSchool of Nursing, Johns Hopkins University, 525 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.
Patricia M DavidsonSchool of Nursing, Johns Hopkins University, 525 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.
Kenneth W DionSchool of Nursing, Johns Hopkins University, 525 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.
Sarah L SzantonSchool of Nursing, Johns Hopkins University, 525 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.
Irvin L OngSchool of Nursing, Johns Hopkins University, 525 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: This study examined the published works related to healthcare robotics for older people using the attributes of health, nursing, and the human-computer interaction framework. Design: An integrative literature review. Methods: A search strategy captured 55 eligible articles from databases (CINAHL, Embase, IEEE Xplore, and PubMed) and hand-searching approaches. Bibliometric and content analyses grounded on the health and nursing attributes and human-computer interaction framework were performed using MAXQDA. Finally, results were verified using critical friend feedback by a second reviewer. Results: Most articles were from multiple authorship, published in non-nursing journals, and originating from developed economies. They primarily focused on applying healthcare robots in practice settings, physical health, and communication tasks. Using the human-computer interaction framework, it was found that older adults frequently served as the primary users while nurses, healthcare providers, and researchers functioned as secondary users and operators. Research articles focused on the usability, functionality, and acceptability of robotic systems. At the same time, theoretical papers explored the frameworks and the value of empathy and emotion in robots, human-computer interaction and nursing models and theories supporting healthcare practice, and gerontechnology. Current robotic systems are less anthropomorphic, operated through real-time direct and supervisory inputs, and mainly equipped with visual and auditory sensors and actuators with limited capability in performing health assessments. Conclusion: Results communicate the need for technological competency among nurses, advancements in increasing healthcare robot humanness, and the importance of conscientious efforts from an interdisciplinary research team in improving robotic system usability and utility for the care of older adults.

Indexed as

HealthHuman-computer interactionOlder personRoboticsTechnology

Identifiers

PMID38745638
PMCPMC11080351

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.