Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42016571›Full record

ArticleACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction : [proceedings]. ACM/IEEE Conference on Human-Robot Interaction2025

Lessons Learned from Designing and Evaluating a Robot-assisted Feeding System for Out-of-lab Use.

Amal Nanavati, Ethan K Gordon, Taylor A Kessler Faulkner, Yuxin Ray Song, Jonathan Ko, Tyler Schrenk, Vy Nguyen, Bernie Hao Zhu, Haya Bolotski, Atharva Kashyap and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction : [proceedings]. ACM/IEEE Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Lessons Learned from Designing and Evaluating a Robot-assisted Feeding System for Out-of-lab Use.ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction : [proceedings]. ACM/IEEE Conference on Human-Robot Interaction · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

Amal NanavatiUniversity of Washington, USA.
Ethan K GordonUniversity of Pennsylvania, USA.
Taylor A Kessler FaulknerUniversity of Washington, USA.
Yuxin Ray SongUniversity of Washington, USA.
Jonathan KoLinKo PLLC, USA.
Tyler SchrenkThe Tyler Schrenk Foundation, USA.
Vy NguyenHello Robot, USA.
Bernie Hao ZhuUniversity of Washington, USA.
Haya BolotskiMassachusets Institute of Technology, USA.
Atharva KashyapUniversity of Michigan, USA.
Sriram KuttyUniversity of Washington, USA.
Raida KarimUniversity of Washington, USA.
Liander RainboltUniversity of Washington, USA.
Rosario ScaliseUniversity of Washington, USA.
Hanjun SongMassachusets Institute of Technology, USA.
Ramon QuUniversity of Washington, USA.
Maya CakmakUniversity of Washington, USA.
Siddhartha S SrinivasaUniversity of Washington, USA.

Funding

NRI: Adaptive Teleoperation Interfaces for In-Home Assistive RobotsR01EB034580 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI CAKMAK, MAYA · 2023 to 2025
$428k
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB034580
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Millions of people cannot eat independently due to a disability, and caregiver-assisted meals can make them feel self-conscious, pressured, or burdensome. Robot-assisted feeding promises to empower people with motor impairments to feed themselves. However, current research typically examines specific robotic system subcomponents and evaluates them in controlled lab settings. This leaves a gap in developing and evaluating an end-to-end system that can feed entire meals in out-of-lab settings. We present one such system, which we developed collaboratively with two community researchers (CRs) with motor-impairments. The key challenge of developing a robot feeding system for out-of-lab use is the varied off-nominal scenarios that inevitably arise. Our key insight is that users can overcome many off-nominals, provided customizability and control over the system. Our system improves upon the state-of-the-art with: (1) a user interface that provides substantial user customizability and control, (2) a bite selection implementation that incorporates users-in-the-loop to generalize across food items, and (3) portable hardware that facilitates system use in diverse environments without inhibiting user mobility. We conduct two studies to evaluate the system. In Study 1, five users with motor impairments and one CR use the system to feed themselves meals of their choice in a cafeteria, office, or conference room. In Study 2, one CR uses the system in his home for five days, feeding himself 10 meals across diverse contexts. We present 3 key lesson learned: (1) spatial contexts are numerous, customizability lets users adapt to them; (2) off-nominals will arise, variable autonomy lets users overcome them; and (3) assistive robots' benefits depend on context. We provide video footage and code on our website.

Indexed as

human-robot interactionrobot-assisted feeding

Identifiers

PMID42016571
PMCPMC13094382

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.