Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42113830›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

The expected benefits of using social robots when working with institutionalised older adults: A qualitative study among healthcare professionals.

Sanja Balalic, Robbert Sanderman, Nick Degens, Marrit Tuinman, Mariët Hagedoorn

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Sanja BalalicSchool of Social Studies, Hanze University, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9140-5112
Robbert SandermanDepartment of Health Psychology, HPC FA12, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Nick DegensHKU University of the Arts, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Marrit TuinmanDepartment of Health Psychology, HPC FA12, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Mariët HagedoornDepartment of Health Psychology, HPC FA12, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The shortage of healthcare professionals increasingly challenges the provision of care for institutionalised older adults. This study investigates healthcare professionals' expectations regarding the added value of social robots in daily care, as their perspective is adamant for implementation of these robots but not yet fully investigated. Two consecutive focus group sessions were conducted across three nursing homes with 24 healthcare professionals. The first session focused on identifying potential ways in which social robots could add value for both staff and residents. After sharing suggestions across all groups, the second session facilitated cross-validation and in-depth discussion of practical implications. Data were analysed using qualitative thematic analysis. Healthcare professionals expected several benefits from using a social robot, including reduced workload and mental strain, improved work atmosphere, and potentially heightened job satisfaction. For residents, expected benefits included promotion of self-care and self-reliance through reminders and notifications, and provision of companionship during lonely periods. Reported possible barriers included limited technical knowledge and lack of support from residents' families. Participants expected that social robots could help save time and energy, enabling more focused attention on residents needing support-even those who may not actively seek it. Professionals indicated that this might enhance both residents' well-being and the quality and satisfaction of their own work. Implementing some of the specific suggestions from professionals merits further investigation.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelRoboticsAgedFemaleFocus GroupsHumansJob SatisfactionMaleNursing Home ResidentsNursing HomesQualitative Research

Identifiers

PMID42113830
PMCPMC13160325

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.