ArticleJMIR human factors2024
Cocreative Development of Robotic Interaction Systems for Health Care: Scoping Review.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Acceptance of Digital Technology Among Nursing Staff in Geriatric Long-Term Care: Systematic Review.JMIR nursing · 2026Pooled it
- Developing a Cross-Device Platform for Robotic Systems in Nursing Care: Mixed Methods Feasibility Study.JMIR nursing · 2026Article
- HEalthcare Robotics' ONtology (HERON): An Upper Ontology for Communication, Collaboration and Safety in Healthcare Robotics.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- User-Centered Prototype Design of a Health Care Robot for Treating Type 2 Diabetes in the Community Pharmacy: Development and Usability Study.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
- Sustainable Implementation of Digital Assistive Technologies in Health Care Through a Simplified Interaction and Control Platform: Protocol for a Cocreative Feasibility Study.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
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
Background: Robotic technologies present challenges to health care professionals and are therefore rarely used. Barriers such as lack of controllability and adaptability and complex control functions affect the human-robot relationship. In addition to educational opportunities, the possibility of individual adaptation can improve the usability and practical implementation of robotics. Previous work has focused on developments from a technology-centered perspective and has included user interests too late in the process. Objective: This study addresses the following research question: What cocreative research approaches are used in the field of nursing robotics to improve the usability, intended use, and goal-directed application of robotic developments for nurses and to support the nursing process? Methods: This scoping review provides an overview of the topic and the research activities taking place within it. Five databases and the reference lists of the identified publications were searched for studies without further restrictions. Studies were included if they developed and evaluated interaction and control platforms for robotic systems in health care in a cocreative way with end users. Results: The search resulted in 419 hits, of which 3 publications were included. All publications were feasibility or user studies that were mainly carried out in the European Union. The 3 interaction and control platforms presented were all prototypes and not commercially available. In addition to those in need of care, all studies also included family carers and health care professionals. Conclusions: Robotic interaction and control platforms in health care are rarely, if ever, developed and evaluated with feasibility or user studies that include prototypes and end users. While the involvement of end users is crucial, this review emphasizes that all stakeholders, including health care professionals, should participate in the development process to ensure a holistic understanding of application needs and a focus on user experiences and practical health care needs. It is emphasized that the active involvement of end users in the development process is critical to effectively meeting the needs of the target group.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.