The Robot Screener Will See You Now: A Socially Assistive Robot for COVID-19 Screening in Long-Term Care Homes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rapid spread of COVID-19 around the globe has increased the need to adopt autonomous social robots within our healthcare systems. In particular, socially assistive robots can help to improve the day-to-day functioning of our healthcare facilities including long-term care, while keeping residents and staff safe by performing repetitive tasks such as health screening. In this paper, we present the first human-robot interaction study with an autonomous multi-task socially assistive robot used for non-contact screening in long-term care homes. The robot monitors temperature, checks for face masks, and asks screening questions to minimize human-to-human contact. We investigated staff perceptions of 7 attributes: screening experience without and with the robot, efficiency, cognitive attitude, freeing up staff, safety, affective attitude, and intent to use the robot. Furthermore, we investigated the influence of demographics on these attributes. Study results show that, overall, staff rated these attributes high for the screening robot, with a statistically significant increase in cognitive attitude and safety after interacting with the robot. Differences between gender and occupation were also determined. Our study highlights the potential application of an autonomous screening robot for long-term care homes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".