Socially Assistive Robots Helping Older Adults through the Pandemic and Life after COVID-19
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has critically impacted the health and safety of the population of the world, especially the health and well-being of older adults. Socially assistive robots (SARs) have been used to help to mitigate the effects of the pandemic including loneliness and isolation, and to alleviate the workload of both formal and informal caregivers. This paper presents the first extensive survey and discussion on just how socially assistive robots have specifically helped this population, as well as the overall impact on health and the acceptance of such robots during the pandemic. The goal of this review is to answer research questions with respect to which SARs were used during the pandemic and what specific tasks they were used for, and what the enablers and barriers were to the implementation of SARs during the pandemic. We will also discuss lessons learned from their use to inform future SAR design and applications, and increase their usefulness and adoption in a post-pandemic world. More research is still needed to investigate and appreciate the user experience of older adults with SARs during the pandemic, and we aim to provide a roadmap for researchers and stakeholders.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".