MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323536948 · doi:10.1145/3568294.3580127

Co-design of a Social Robot for Distraction in the Paediatric Emergency Department

2023· article· en· W4323536948 on OpenAlexafffund
Mary Ellen Foster, Patricia Candelaria, Lauren Dwyer, Summer Hudson, Alan Lindsay, Fareha Nishat, Mykelle Pacquing, Ronald P. A. Petrick, Andrés A. Ramírez-Duque, Jennifer Stinson, Frauke Zeller, Samina Ali

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSocial Robot Interaction and HRI
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of Alberta
FundersEconomic and Social Research CouncilSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRobotDistractionContext (archaeology)DistressAutonomyPsychological interventionHealth careSocial robotEmergency departmentComputer sciencePsychologyNursingHuman–computer interactionApplied psychologyMedical emergencyArtificial intelligenceMedicineMobile robotRobot controlClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We are developing a social robot to help children cope with painful and distressing medical procedures in the hospital emergency department. This is a domain where a range of interventions have proven effective at reducing pain and distress, including social robots; however, until now, the robots have been designed with limited stakeholder involvement and have shown limited autonomy. For our system, we have defined and validated the necessary robot behaviour together with children, parents/caregivers, and healthcare professionals, taking into account the ethical and social implications of robotics and AI in the paediatric healthcare context. The result of the co-design process has been captured in a flowchart, which has been converted into a set of concrete design guidelines for the AI-based autonomous robot system.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSocial Robot Interaction and HRIFrench-language works237,207