ArticleFrontiers in robotics and AI2025
Designing socially assistive robots for clinical practice: insights from an asynchronous remote community of speech-language pathologists.
Article in Frontiers in robotics and AI, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Affective Computing Approaches in Child-Robot Interaction: A Systematic Review and Taxonomy.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Pooled it
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
Introduction: Socially Assistive Robots (SARs) hold promise for augmenting speech-language therapy by addressing high caseloads and enhancing child engagement. However, many implementations remain misaligned with clinician practices and overlook expressive strategies central to speech-language pathology. Methods: We conducted a 4-week Asynchronous Remote Community (ARC) study with thirteen licensed speech-language pathologists (SLPs). Participants engaged in weekly activities and asynchronous discussions, contributing reflective insights on emotional expression, domain-specific needs, and potential roles for SARs. The ARC format supported distributed, flexible engagement and facilitated iterative co-design through longitudinal peer dialogue. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis to identify emerging patterns. Results: Analysis revealed five clinician-driven design considerations for SARs: (1) the need for expressive and multi-modal communication; (2) customization of behaviors to accommodate sensory and developmental profiles; (3) adaptability of roles across therapy contexts; (4) ethical concerns surrounding overuse and fears of clinician replacement; and (5) opportunities for data tracking and personalization. Discussion: Findings highlight clinician-informed design implications that can guide the development of socially intelligent, adaptable, and ethically grounded SARs. The ARC approach proved a viable co-design framework, enabling deeper reflection and peer-driven requirements than traditional short-term methods. This work bridges the gap between robotic capabilities and clinical expectations, underscoring the importance of embedding clinician expertise in SAR design to foster meaningful integration into speech-language interventions.
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.