MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3207613685 · doi:10.3390/su132011502

PARO as a Biofeedback Medical Device for Mental Health in the COVID-19 Era

2021· article· en· W3207613685 on OpenAlexaff
Takanori Shibata, Lillian Hung, Sandra Petersen, Kate Darling, Kaoru Inoue, Katharine Martyn, Yoko Hori, Geoffrey W. Lane, Davis Park, Ruth Mizoguchi, Chihiro Takano, Sarah Harper, George W. Leeson, Joseph F. Coughlin

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of Science
KeywordsMental healthAnxietyPandemicSocial distanceIntervention (counseling)DistressCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PsychologyMedicineBiofeedbackApplied psychologyInternet privacyNursingPsychiatryPsychotherapistComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic is spreading across the globe, and it could take years for society to fully recover. Personal protective equipment (PPE), various hygiene measures, and social distancing have been implemented to reduce “human to human” contact, which is an essential part of outbreak prevention. The pressure of the pandemic combined with decreased communication and social contact have taken a toll on the mental health of many individuals, especially with respect to anxiety and depression. Effective use of robots and technology as a substitute for—or in coordination with—traditional medicine could play a valuable role in reducing psychological distress now more than ever. This paper summarizes the results of a comprehensive review of clinical research on PARO, a therapeutic seal robot, which has been used extensively as a biofeedback medical device and socially assistive robot in the field of mental health. PARO has proven to be an effective and economical non-pharmacological intervention method for both mental and physical well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. Utilization of PARO during these times has provided more data for consideration and has helped in mitigating the negative stigma surrounding using robots in therapeutic settings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.370 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations29
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207