Observational studyJournal of medical systems2024
An Assessment of an Inpatient Robotic Nurse Assistant: A Mixed-Method Study.
Observational study in Journal of medical systems, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline 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
- Hospital-Based Robotic Applications in Nursing Practice: A Scoping Review.Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The worldwide nursing shortage has led to the exploration of using robotics to support care delivery and reduce nurses' workload. In this observational, mixed-method study, we examined the implementation of a robotic nurse assistant (RNA) in a hospital ward to support vital signs measurements, medication, and item delivery. Human-robot interaction was assessed in four domains: usability, social acceptance, user experience, and its societal impact. Patients in a general medicine ward were recruited to participate in a one-time trial with the RNA and a post-trial 75-question survey. Patients' interactions with the RNA were video recorded for analysis including patients' behaviours, facial emotions, and visual attention. Focus group discussions with nurses elicited their perceptions of working with the RNA, areas for improvement, and scalability. Sixty-seven patients aged 21-79 participated in the trial. Eight in 10 patients reported positive interactions with the RNA. When the RNA did not perform to expectations, only 25% of patients attributed fault to the RNA. Video analysis showed patients at ease interacting with the RNA despite some technical problems. Nurses saw potential for the RNA taking over routine tasks. However, they were sceptical of real time savings and were concerned with the RNA's ability to work well with older patients. Patients and nurses suggested greater interactivity between RNA and patients. Future studies should examine potential timesaving and whether time saved translated to nurses performing higher value clinical tasks. The utility of improved RNA's social capability in a hospital setting should be explored as well.
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.