ReviewBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Exploring the Impact of Socially Assistive Robots in Rehabilitation Scenarios.
Review in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond Cybathlon: on-demand quadrupedal assistance for people with limited mobility.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Challenges in accessing and implementing innovative interventions in occupational therapy.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Human-AI co-research on design and evaluation of Embodied Conversational Agent in rehabilitation contexts.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2026Article
- A randomized pilot study evaluating socially assistive robot effects on patient engagement and care quality.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Tactile Interaction with Socially Assistive Robots for Children with Physical Disabilities.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Orthopedic Surgery: Current Applications, Challenges, and Future Directions.MedComm · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSocially Assistive Robots (SARs) represent an innovative approach in rehabilitation technology, significantly enhancing the support and motivation for individuals across diverse rehabilitation settings. Despite their growing utilization, especially in stroke recovery and pediatric rehabilitation, their potential in musculoskeletal and orthopedic rehabilitation remains largely underexplored. Although there is methodological and outcome variability across the included studies, this review aims to critically evaluate and summarize the research on SARs in rehabilitation, providing a thorough overview of the current evidence and practical applications.
methodsA comprehensive search was conducted across multiple databases, resulting in the selection of 20 studies for analysis. The reviewed papers were categorized into three main classes based on the roles of the robots in rehabilitation: Motivation, Imitation, and Feedback Providers.
resultsThe analysis highlights that SARs significantly improve adherence to rehabilitation programs, enhance motor function, and increase motivation across clinical and home settings. Robots such as NAO, Pepper, and ZORA demonstrated high efficacy, particularly in stroke recovery and pediatric rehabilitation.
conclusionsSARs offer transformative benefits in rehabilitation, providing scalable, personalized solutions through motivational support, guided exercises, and real-time feedback. Their integration into orthopedic rehabilitation could address critical clinical needs, enhancing precision in exercises, adherence to long-term programs, and overall patient outcomes. Future research should prioritize the development and validation of SAR-based interventions for musculoskeletal disorders to unlock their full potential in this domain.
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.