MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975112618 · doi:10.1145/2559206.2579529

Medi, human robot interaction in pediatric health

2014· article· en· W1975112618 on OpenAlexaff
Setareh Aghel Manesh, Tanya Beran, Ehud Sharlin, Saul Greenberg

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicChild and Adolescent Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman–robot interactionComputer scienceRobotHuman–computer interactionArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When children go through a medical procedure (e.g. a blood draw), they often experience increased levels of anxiety and stress. We believe that having an empathetic robot companion during the procedure can help children cope with pain and improve their overall experience. The robot makes use of a set of behaviors derived from pain management literature and modeled on human behaviors and cognitive behavioral therapy. In order to investigate the role of the robot as social companion, we are currently performing a Wizard of Oz study at a children's hospital. Our results are preliminary, but so far we have observed - as illustrated in the video - that the robot can improve the experience for children as long as they are not highly agitated.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.732

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.073
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.393 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicChild and Adolescent HealthFrench-language works237,207