Humanoid robots for assisting people with physical disabilities in activities of daily living: a scoping review

References

• Andtfolk, M., Nyholm, L., Eide, H., & Fagerstrom, L. (2021). Humanoid robots in the care of older persons: A scoping review. Assistive Technology: The Official Journal of RESNA, 34(5), 518–526. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2021.1880493
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arksey, H., & O’Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616
   Google Scholar
• Arnold, T., & Scheutz, M. (2018). Observing robot touch in context: How does touch and attitude affect perceptions of a Robot’s social qualities? [Paper presentation]. HRI ’18: Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction February 2018. 352–360. https://doi.org/10.1145/3171221.3171263
   Google Scholar
• Bajones, M., Fischinger, D., Weiss, A., de la Puente, P., Wolf, D., Vincze, M., Kortner, T., Weninger, M., Papoutsakis, K., Michel, D., Qammaz, A., Panteleris, P., Foukarakis, M., Adami, I., Ioannidi, D., Leonidis, A., Antona, M., Argyros, A., … Frennert, S. (2020). Results of field trials with a mobile service robot for older adults in 16 private households [robotics 4140]. ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction, 9(2), 1–27. (Journal of Human-Robot Interaction). https://doi.org/10.1145/3368554
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bajones, M., Fischinger, D., Weiss, A., Wolf, D., Vincze, M., De La Puente, P., Körtner, T., Weninger, M., Papoutsakis, K., Michel, D., Qammaz, A., Panteleris, P., Foukarakis, M., Adami, I., Ioannidi, D., Leonidis, A., Antona, M., Argyros, A., Mayer, P., … Frennert, S. (2018). Hobbit: Providing fall detection and prevention for the elderly in the real world [Article]. Journal of Robotics, 2018, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/1754657
   Google Scholar
• Bakracheva, M., Chivarov, N., & Ivanov, A. (2020). Companion robotic assistants for improving the quality of life of people with disabilities. 2020 International Conference Automatics and Informatics (ICAI), Varna, Bulgaria, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICAI50593.2020.9311320
   Google Scholar
• Bangor, A., Kortum, P. T., & Miller, J. T. (2008). An empirical evaluation of the system usability scale. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 24(6), 574–594. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447310802205776
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartneck, C., Kulić, D., Croft, E., & Zoghbi, S. (2009). Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. International Journal of Social Robotics, 1(1), 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-008-0001-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Battistuzzi, L., Sgorbissa, A., Papadopoulos, C., Papadopoulos, I., & Koulouglioti, C. (2018). Embedding ethics in the design of culturally competent socially assistive robots. 2018 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), Madrid, Spain, 1996–2001. https://doi.org/10.1109/IROS.2018.8594361
   Google Scholar
• Beaudoin, M., Lettre, J., Routhier, F., Archambault, P. S., Lemay, M., & Gélinas, I. (2019). Long-term use of the JACO robotic arm: A case series. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 14(3), 267–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2018.1428692
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bedaf, S., de Witte, L., Marti, P., & Amirabdollahian, F. (2018). A multi-perspective evaluation of a service robot for seniors: The voice of different stakeholders. Disability and Rehabilitation Assistive Technology, 13(6), 592–599. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2017.1358300
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bedaf, S., Draper, H., Gelderblom, G.-J., Sorell, T., & de Witte, L. (2016). Can a service robot which supports independent living of older people disobey a command? The views of older people, informal carers and professional caregivers on the acceptability of robots [robotics 4140]. International Journal of Social Robotics, 8(3), 409–420. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-016-0336-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bedaf, S., Gelderblom, G. J. A., Syrdal, D. S. V., Lehmann, H., Michel, H., Hewson, D., Amirabdollahian, F., Dautenhahn, K., & de Witte, L. (2014). Which activities threaten independent living of elderly when becoming problematic: Inspiration for meaningful service robot functionality. Disability and Rehabilitation Assistive Technology, 9(6), 445–452. https://doi.org/10.3109/17483107.2013.840861
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Beer, J. M., Fisk, A. D., & Rogers, W. A. (2015). Commanding home robots: A comparison between older adults with and without mobility loss. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 59(1), 70–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931215591015
   Google Scholar
• Beer, J. M., Prakash, A., Smarr, C.-A., Chen, T. L., Hawkins, K., Nguyen, H., Deyle, T., Mitzner, T. L., Kemp, C. C., & Rogers, W. A. (2017). Older users’ acceptance of an assistive robot: Attitudinal changes following brief exposure [health psychology & medicine 3360]. Gerontechnology, 16(1), 21–36. https://doi.org/10.4017/gt.2017.16.1.003.00
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Beer, J. M., Prakash, A., Smarr, C.-A., Mitzner, T. L., Kemp, C. C., & Rogers, W. A. (2012). “Commanding your robot” older adults’ preferences for methods of robot control. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 56(1), 1263–1267. https://doi.org/10.1177/1071181312561224
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bevilacqua, R., Felici, E., Amabili, G., Maranesi, E., & Cavallo, F. (2021). Designing acceptable robots for assisting older adults: A pilot study on the willingness to interact. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(20), 10686. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182010686
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bevilacqua, R., Felici, E., Marcellini, F., Glende, S., Klemcke, S., Conrad, I., Esposito, R., Cavallo, F., & Dario, P. (2015). Robot-era project: Preliminary results on the system usability. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 9188, 553–561. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20889-3_51
   Google Scholar
• Bilyea, A., Seth, N., Nesathurai, S., & Abdullah, H. A. (2017). Robotic assistants in personal care: A scoping review. Medical Engineering and Physics, 49, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medengphy.2017.06.038
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boada, J. P., Maestre, B. R., & Genís, C. T. (2021). The ethical issues of social assistive robotics: A critical literature review. Technology in Society, 67, 101726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101726
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brandl, C., Mertens, A., & Schlick, C. M. (2016). Human-robot interaction in assisted personal services: Factors influencing distances that humans will accept between themselves and an approaching service robot [robotics 4140]. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 26(6), 713–727. https://doi.org/10.1002/hfm.20675
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Broadbent, E., Kerse, N., Peri, K., Robinson, H., Jayawardena, C., Kuo, T., Datta, C., Stafford, R., Butler, H., Jawalkar, P., Amor, M., Robins, B., & MacDonald, B. (2016). Benefits and problems of health-care robots in aged care settings: A comparison trial. Australasian Journal on Ageing, 35(1), 23–29. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajag.12190
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cavallo, F., Esposito, R., Limosani, R., Manzi, A., Dario, P., Bevilacqua, R., Felici, E., Lattanzio, F., DiNuovo, A., & Cangelosi, A. (2018). Robotic services acceptance in smart environments with older adults: User satisfaction and acceptability study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 20(9), e264. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.9460
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cavallo, F., Limosani, R., Manzi, A., Bonaccorsi, M., Esposito, R., DiRocco, M., Pecora, F., Teti, G., Saffiotti, A., & Dario, P. (2014). Development of a socially believable multi-robot solution from town to home [robotics 4140]. Cognitive Computation, 6(4), 954–967. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12559-014-9290-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, T. L., Ciocarlie, M., Cousins, S., Grice, P. M., Hawkins, K., Kaijen, H., Kemp, C. C., Chih-Hung, K., Lazewatsky, D. A., Leeper, A. E., Hai, N., Paepcke, A., Pantofaru, C., Smart, W. D., & Takayama, L. (2013). Robots for humanity: Using assistive robotics to empower people with disabilities. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, 20(1), 30–39. https://doi.org/10.1109/mra.2012.2229950
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deutsch, I., Erel, H., Paz, M., Hoffman, G., & Zuckerman, O. (2019). Home robotic devices for older adults: Opportunities and concerns. Computers in Human Behavior, 98, 122–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.04.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DiNuovo, A., Broz, F., Belpaeme, T., Cangelosi, A., Cavallo, F., Esposito, R., & Dario, P. (2014). A web based multi-modal interface for elderly users of the robot-era multi-robot services. IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (SMC), San Diego, CA, USA, 2186–2191. https://doi.org/10.1109/SMC.2014.6974248
   Google Scholar
• DiNuovo, A., Broz, F., Wang, N., Belpaeme, T., Cangelosi, A., Jones, R., Esposito, R., Cavallo, F., & Dario, P. (2018). The multi-modal interface of robot-era multi-robot services tailored for the elderly [robotics 4140]. Intelligent Service Robotics, 11(1), 109–126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11370-017-0237-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eftring, H., & Frennert, S. (2016). Designing a social and assistive robot for seniors [gerontology 2860]. Zeitschrift für Gerontologie und Geriatrie, 49(4), 274–281. (Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00391-016-1064-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The EndNote Team. (2013). EndNote. In (Version EndNote X9) [64 bit]. Clarivate Analytics.
   Google Scholar
• Fischinger, D., Einramhof, P., Papoutsakis, K., Wohlkinger, W., Mayer, P., Panek, P., Hofmann, S., Koertner, T., Weiss, A., Argyros, A., & Vincze, M. (2016). Hobbit, a care robot supporting independent living at home: First prototype and lessons learned. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 75, 60–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2014.09.029
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foukarakis, M., Antona, M., & Stephanidis, C. (2017). Applying a multimodal user interface development framework on a domestic service robot. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments, Island of Rhodes, Greece. https://doi.org/10.1145/3056540.3076187
   Google Scholar
• Gerlowska, J., Skrobas, U., Grabowska-Aleksandrowicz, K., Korchut, A., Szklener, S., Szczesniak-Stanczyk, D., Tzovaras, D., & Rejdak, K. (2018). Assessment of perceived attractiveness, usability, and societal impact of a multimodal robotic assistant for aging patients with memory impairments. Frontiers in Neurology, 9, 392. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2018.00392
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gignac, M. A. M., & Cott, C. (1998, September). A conceptual model of independence and dependence for adults with chronic physical illness and disability. Social Science & Medicine, 47(6), 739–753. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-9536(98)00149-X
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grice, P. M., & Kemp, C. C. (2019). In-home and remote use of robotic body surrogates by people with profound motor deficits. Public Library of Science One, 14(3), e0212904. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0212904
   Google Scholar
• Grice, P. M., Killpack, M. D., Jain, A., Vaish, S., Hawke, J., & Kemp, C. C. (2013). Whole-arm tactile sensing for beneficial and acceptable contact during robotic assistance. IEEE International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics (ICORR), Seattle, WA, USA, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICORR.2013.6650464
   Google Scholar
• Hancock, P. A., Billings, D. R., Schaefer, K. E., Chen, J. Y. C., de Visser, E. J., & Parasuraman, R. (2011). A meta-analysis of factors affecting trust in human-robot interaction. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors & Ergonomics Society, 53(5), 517–527. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720811417254
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hassenzahl, M., Burmester, M., & Koller, F. (2003). AttrakDiff: Ein Fragebogen zur Messung wahrgenommener hedonischer und pragmatischer Qualität. In G. Szwillus & J. Ziegler (Eds.), Mensch & Computer 2003: Interaktion in Bewegung (pp. 187–196). Vieweg+Teubner Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-80058-9_19
   Google Scholar
• Heerink, M., Krose, B., Evers, V., & Wielinga, B. (2010). Assessing acceptance of assistive social agent technology by older adults: The Almere model. International Journal of Social Robotics, 2(4), 361–375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-010-0068-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hendrich, N., Bistry, H., & Zhang, J. (2015). Architecture and software design for a service robot in an elderly-care scenario. Engineering, 1(1), 027–035. https://doi.org/10.15302/J-ENG-2015007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ICF Research Branch. (2017). ICF research branch. Retrieved June 14, from. https://www.icf-research-branch.org/
   Google Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization. (2022). (ISO – 11.180). aids for disabled or handicapped persons.
   Google Scholar
• Kapusta, A. S., Grice, P. M., Clever, H. M., Chitalia, Y., Park, D., & Kemp, C. C. (2019). A system for bedside assistance that integrates a robotic bed and a mobile manipulator. Public Library of Science One, 14(10), e0221854. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221854
   Google Scholar
• Koay, K. L., Syrdal, D. S., Ashgari-Oskoei, M., Walters, M. L., & Dautenhahn, K. (2014). Social roles and baseline proxemic preferences for a domestic service robot. International Journal of Social Robotics, 6(4), 469–488. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-014-0232-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Körtner, T., Schmid, A., Batko-Klein, D., & Gisinger, C. (2014). Meeting requirements of older users? Robot prototype trials in a home-like environment. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 8515, 660–671. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07446-7_63
   Google Scholar
• Kritikos, M. (2018). Assistive technologies for people with disabilities. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2018/603218/EPRS_IDA(2018)603218_EN.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Lammer, L., Huber, A., Weiss, A., & Vincze, M. (2014). Mutual care: How older adults react when they should help their care robot. AISB 2014 – 50th Annual Convention of the AISB.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, H. R., & Riek, L. D. (2018). Reframing assistive robots to promote successful aging [robotics 4140]. ACM Transactions of Human-Robot Interaction, 7(1), 1–23. (Journal of Human-Robot Interaction). https://doi.org/10.1145/3203303
   Google Scholar
• Lee, H. R., Tan, H., & Sabanovic, S. (2016). That robot is not for me: Addressing stereotypes of aging in assistive robot design. 25th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, RO-MAN 2016, New York, NY, USA, 312–317. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2016.7745148
   Google Scholar
• Levac, D., Colquhoun, H., & O’Brien, K. K. (2010). Scoping studies: Advancing the methodology. Implementation Science, 5(1), 69. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-5-69
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mejia, A. (2015). Robotic interfaces design avatar and GUI competing for older user’s attention. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 9193. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20913-5_28
   Google Scholar
• Melkas, H., Hennala, L., Pekkarinen, S., & Kyrki, V. (2020). Impacts of robot implementation on care personnel and clients in elderly-care institutions [article]. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 134, Article 104041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2019.104041
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ouzzani, M., Hammady, H., Fedorowicz, Z., & Elmagarmid, A. (2016). Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews, 5(1), 210. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Papadopoulos, I., Lazzarino, R., Ali, S., & Koulouglioti, C. (2020). Enablers and barriers to the implementation of socially assistive humanoid robots in health and social care: A systematic review. British Medical Journal Open, 10(1), 033096. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033096
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park, D., Hoshi, Y., Mahajan, H. P., Kim, H. K., Erickson, Z., Rogers, W. A., & Kemp, C. C. (2020). Active robot-assisted feeding with a general-purpose mobile manipulator: Design, evaluation, and lessons learned [article]. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 124, Article 103344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2019.103344
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peters, M., Godfrey, C., McInerney, P., Munn, Z., Tricco, A., & Khalil, H. (2021). Chapter 11: Scoping reviews (2020 version). Joanna Briggs Institute. Retrieved 22.12.22 from https://synthesismanual.jbi.global.1046658/JBIMES-20-12
   Google Scholar
• Peters, M. D. J., Marnie, C., Tricco, A. C., Pollock, D., Munn, Z., Alexander, L., McInerney, P., Godfrey, C. M., & Khalil, H. (2020). Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evidence Synthesis, 18(10), 2119–2126. https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-20-00167
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Piasek, J., & Wieczorowska-Tobis, K. (2018). Acceptance and long-term use of a social robot by elderly users in a domestic environment. Proceedings – 2018 11th International Conference on Human System Interaction, HSI 2018, Gdansk, Poland. https://doi.org/10.1109/HSI.2018.8431348
   Google Scholar
• Pino, M., Boulay, M., Rigaud, A.-S., & Jouen, F. (2015). “Are we ready for robots that care for us?” attitudes and opinions of older adults toward socially assistive robots. Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 7(JLc), 141. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2015.00141
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Prakash, A., Beer, J. M., Deyle, T., Smarr, C. A., Chen, T. L., Mitzner, T. L., Kemp, C. C., & Rogers, W. A. (2013). Older adults’ medication management in the home: How can robots help? ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, Tokyo, Japan. https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2013.6483600
   Google Scholar
• Prakash, A., Kemp, C. C., & Rogers, W. A. (2014). Older adults’ reactions to a robot’s appearance in the context of home use. ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, Bielefeld, Germany, 268–269. https://doi.org/10.1145/2559636.2559790
   Google Scholar
• Pripfl, J., Körtner, T., Batko-Klein, D., Hebesberger, D., Weninger, M., & Gisinger, C. (2016a). Social service robots to support independent living: Experiences from a field trial [article]. Zeitschrift für Gerontologie und Geriatrie, 49(4), 282–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00391-016-1067-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pripfl, J., Körtner, T., Batko-Klein, D., Hebesberger, D., Weninger, M., Gisinger, C., Frennert, S., Eftring, H., Antona, M., Adami, I., Weiss, A., Bajones, M., & Vincze, M. (2016b). Results of a real world trial with a mobile social service robot for older adults. ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, 2016, Christchurch, New Zealand, 497–498. https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2016.7451824
   Google Scholar
• Reeves, B., Hancock, J., & Liu, X. (2020). Social robots are like real people: First impressions, attributes, and stereotyping of social robots. Technology, Mind, and Behavior, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.1037/tmb0000018
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Robinson, F., & Nejat, G. (2022). An analysis of design recommendations for socially assistive robot helpers for effective human-robot interactions in senior care. Journal of Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies Engineering, 9, 20556683221101389. https://doi.org/10.1177/20556683221101389
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenthal von der Pütten, A. M., & Krämer, N. C. (2015). Individuals’ evaluations of and attitudes towards potentially uncanny robots. International Journal of Social Robotics, 7(5), 799–824. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-015-0321-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saunders, J., Syrdal, D. S., Koay, K. L., Burke, N., & Dautenhahn, K. (2016). ‘Teach me-show me’-end-user personalization of a smart home and companion robot [article]. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, 46(1), 27–40. Article 7322264. https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2015.2445105
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Savela, N., Turja, T., & Oksanen, A. (2017). Social acceptance of Robots in different occupational fields: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Social Robotics, 10(4), 493–502. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-017-0452-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schrepp, M., Hinderks, A., & Thomaschewski, J. (2014). Applying the User Experience Questionnaire (UEQ) in different evaluation scenarios. Design, user experience, and usability. Theories, methods, and tools for designing the user experience. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07668-3_37
   Google Scholar
• Smarr, C.-A., Mitzner, T. L., Beer, J. M., Prakash, A., Chen, T. L., Kemp, C. C., & Rogers, W. A. (2014). Domestic robots for older adults: Attitudes, preferences, and potential [gerontology 2860]. International Journal of Social Robotics, 6(2), 229–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-013-0220-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smarr, C. A., Prakash, A., Beer, J. M., Mitzner, T. L., Kemp, C. C., & Rogers, W. A. (2012). Older adults’ preferences for and acceptance of robot assistance for everyday living tasks. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 56(1), 153–157. https://doi.org/10.1177/1071181312561009
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Softbank Robotics. (2023, November 12). https://us.softbankrobotics.com/nao;https://us.softbankrobotics.com/pepper
   Google Scholar
• Song, W. K., Song, W. J., Kim, Y., & Kim, J. (2013). Usability test of KNRC self-feeding robot. IEEE International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, Seattle,WA,USA. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICORR.2013.6650501
   Google Scholar
• Tricco, A. C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O’Brien, K. K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., Moher, D., Peters, M. D. J., Horsley, T., Weeks, L., Hempel, S., Akl, E. A., Chang, C., McGowan, J., Stewart, L., Hartling, L., Aldcroft, A., Wilson, M. G., Tunçalp, Ö.… Straus, S. E. (2018). PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and explanation. Annals of Internal Medicine, 169(7), 467–473. https://doi.org/10.7326/m18-0850
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• University of Cincinatty UC Health. (2021). Benefits of robotic surgery. University of Cincinatty UC Health. Retrieved March 18 2023, from. https://www.uchealth.com/services/robotic-surgery/patient-information/benefits/
   Google Scholar
• Vandemeulebroucke, T., de Casterlé, B. D., & Gastmans, C. (2018a). How do older adults experience and perceive socially assistive robots in aged care: A systematic review of qualitative evidence [review]. Aging and Mental Health, 22(2), 149–167. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2017.1286455
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vandemeulebroucke, T., de Casterlé, B. D., & Gastmans, C. (2018b). The use of care robots in aged care: A systematic review of argument-based ethics literature. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 74, 15–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archger.2017.08.014
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vandemeulebroucke, T., Dzi, K., & Gastmans, C. (2021). Older adults’ experiences with and perceptions of the use of socially assistive robots in aged care: A systematic review of quantitative evidence. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 95, 104399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archger.2021.104399
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model. Decision Sciences, 39(Number 2), 273–315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vincze, M., Zagler, W., Lammer, L., Weiss, A., Huber, A., Fischinger, D., Körtner, T., Schmid, A., & Gisinger, C. (2014). Towards a robot for supporting older people to stay longer independent at home [Paper presentation]. Proceedings for the Joint Conference of ISR 2014 – 45th International Symposium on Robotics and Robotik 2014 – 8th German Conference on Robotics, ISR/ROBOTIK 2014, Munich. Tokyo, Japan.
   Google Scholar
• Wang, N., Broz, F., DiNuovo, A., Belpaeme, T., & Cangelosi, A. (2016). A user-centric design of service robots speech interface for the elderly. Recent Advances in Nonlinear Speech Processing, 275–283. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28109-4_28
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. (2017). Health employment and economic growth: An evidence base. IGO. https://www.who.int/hrh/resources/WHO-HLC-Report_web.pdf
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. (2020). State of the World’s nursing 2020. World-Health-Organization.
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. (2021). ICF browser. Retrieved December 22, 2022, from https://apps.who.int/classifications/icfbrowser/
   Google Scholar
• Wu, Y. H., Cristancho-Lacroix, V., Fassert, C., Faucounau, V., De Rotrou, J., & Rigaud, A. S. (2016). The attitudes and perceptions of older adults with mild cognitive impairment toward an assistive robot [article]. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 35(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0733464813515092
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar