ArticleFrontiers in robotics and AI2024
Humanoid patient robot for diagnostic training in medical and psychiatric education.
Article in Frontiers in robotics and AI, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
- Automated capture and transfer of human facial expressions to humanoid robots for realistic patient simulation.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2026Article
- Comparing Patient Simulation With a Humanoid Robot or a Human Actor in Terms of Training Success and Acceptance: Pilot Questionnaire Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Simulation-based learning is an integral part of hands-on learning and is often done through role-playing games or patients simulated by professional actors. In this article, we present the use of a humanoid robot as a simulation patient for the presentation of disease symptoms in the setting of medical education. In a study, 12 participants watched both the patient simulation by the robotic patient and the video with the actor patient. We asked participants about their subjective impressions of the robotic patient simulation compared to the video with the human actor patient using a self-developed questionnaire. In addition, we used the Affinity for Technology Interaction Scale. The evaluation of the questionnaire provided insights into whether the robot was able to realistically represent the patient which features still need to be improved, and whether the robot patient simulation was accepted by the participants as a learning method. Sixty-seven percent of the participants indicated that they would use the robot as a training opportunity in addition to the videos with acting patients. The majority of participants indicated that they found it very beneficial to have the robot repeat the case studies at their own pace.
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.