ArticleFrontiers in digital health2026
Healthcare professionals' perspectives on usefulness, acceptability and implementation conditions of socially assistive robots in France: a cross-sectional survey and cluster analysis.
Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: In healthcare, socially assistive robots are increasingly used for logistical, assistive, and psychosocial purposes, raising ethical, social, and organizational questions. In these contexts, professionals' acceptability varies by use case, perceived risk, and care setting. Understanding how healthcare professionals evaluate these technologies is essential for anticipating their large-scale integration into health systems and its implications for workforce organization and equity of access. Methods: This cross-sectional survey in France examined healthcare professionals' perceptions of socially assistive robots, focusing on perceived usefulness, acceptability, and implementation-related factors. A self-administered 48-item questionnaire covered sociodemographic characteristics, knowledge of robots, perceived usefulness across use cases, importance of implementation factors, and acceptability and intention to use. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, non-parametric tests, and principal component analysis with hierarchical clustering to identify attitudinal profiles. Results: A total of 148 healthcare professionals participated, 77% reporting prior knowledge of robots. Perceived usefulness was generally high, particularly for physical tasks and recreational support, while therapeutic mediation and feeding were rated lower. Ethical, organizational, and regulatory factors were rated as very important, and acceptability was higher for general use than for personal clinical practice. Cluster analysis identified three attitudinal profiles characterized by low, moderate, and high acceptability. Discussion: Healthcare professionals expressed generally favorable but selective attitudes toward socially assistive robots, mainly valuing logistical and organizational support and remaining more cautious about therapeutic and psychosocial uses. Acceptability appeared conditional and context-dependent, linked to perceived usefulness, safeguards, and prior knowledge rather than professional or sociodemographic characteristics. These findings highlight the need for public-health and implementation strategies combining clear ethical and legal frameworks, training, and context-specific integration, and the relevance of longitudinal mixed-method studies to examine how attitudes and adoption evolve with real-world use.
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.