ArticleHumanities & social sciences communications2025
Socially assistive robots and meaningful work: the case of aged care.
Article in Humanities & social sciences communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- [Exploring the potential of the socially assistive robot "Moflin" in institutional aged care].Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie · 2026Article
- Artificial autonomy and algorithmic paternalism: AI shaping human autonomy and decision-making.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- Nurses as guardians of time: the hidden clinical value of continuous care in geriatrics.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- Are caregivers for older adults satisfied with the care robots in the workplace? A cross-sectional study in China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Commentary: Trustworthy and ethical AI in digital mental healthcare - wishful thinking or tangible goal?Internet interventions · 2025Review
- Does Humanness Matter? An Ethical Evaluation of Sharing Care Work with Social Robots.Science and engineering ethics · 2025Article
- Biases in AI: acknowledging and addressing the inevitable ethical issues.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Review
- Socially assistive robots and meaningful work: the case of aged care.Humanities & social sciences communications · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As socially assistive robots (SARs) become increasingly integrated into aged care, it becomes essential to ask: how do these technologies affect caregiving work? Do SARs foster or diminish the conditions conducive to meaningful work? And why does it matter if SARs make caregiving more or less meaningful? This paper addresses these questions by examining the relationship between SARs and the meaningfulness of care work. It argues that SARs should be designed to foster meaningful care work. This presupposes, as we will argue, empowering caregivers to enhance their skills and moral virtues, helping them preserve a sense of purpose, and supporting the integration of caregiving with other aspects of caregivers' personal lives. If caregivers see their work as meaningful, this positively affects not only their well-being but also the well-being of care recipients. We begin by outlining the conditions under which work becomes meaningful, and then we apply this framework to caregiving. We next evaluate how SARs influence these conditions, identifying both opportunities and risks. The discussion concludes with design recommendations to ensure SARs foster meaningful caregiving practices.
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.