TY - JOUR
T1 - The use of social robots with children and young people on the autism spectrum
T2 - A systematic review and meta-analysis
AU - Kouroupa, Athanasia
AU - Laws, Keith R.
AU - Irvine, Karen
AU - Mengoni, Silvana E.
AU - Baird, Alister
AU - Sharma, Shivani
PY - 2022/6/22
Y1 - 2022/6/22
N2 - Background Robot-mediated interventions show promise in supporting the development of children on the autism spectrum. Objectives In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we summarize key features of available evidence on robot-interventions for children and young people on the autism spectrum aged up to 18 years old, as well as consider their efficacy for specific domains of learning. Data sources PubMed, Scopus, EBSCOhost, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, ACM Digital Library, and IEEE Xplore. Grey literature was also searched using PsycExtra, OpenGrey, British Library EThOS, and the British Library Catalogue. Databases were searched from inception until April (6th) 2021. Synthesis methods Searches undertaken across seven databases yielded 2145 articles. Forty studies met our review inclusion criteria of which 17 were randomized control trials. The methodological quality of studies was conducted with the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. A narrative synthesis summarised the findings. A meta-analysis was conducted with 12 RCTs. Results Most interventions used humanoid (67%) robotic platforms, were predominantly based in clinics (37%) followed home, schools and laboratory (17% respectively) environments and targeted at improving social and communication skills (77%). Focusing on the most common outcomes, a random effects meta-analysis of RCTs showed that robot-mediated interventions significantly improved social functioning (g = 0.35 [95%CI 0.09 to 0.61; k = 7). By contrast, robots did not improve emotional (g = 0.63 [95%CI -1.43 to 2.69]; k = 2) or motor outcomes (g = -0.10 [95%CI -1.08 to 0.89]; k = 3), but the numbers of trials were very small. Meta-regression revealed that age accounted for almost one-third of the variance in effect sizes, with greater benefits being found in younger children. Conclusions Overall, our findings support the use of robot-mediated interventions for autistic children and youth, and we propose several recommendations for future research to aid learning and enhance implementation in everyday settings.
AB - Background Robot-mediated interventions show promise in supporting the development of children on the autism spectrum. Objectives In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we summarize key features of available evidence on robot-interventions for children and young people on the autism spectrum aged up to 18 years old, as well as consider their efficacy for specific domains of learning. Data sources PubMed, Scopus, EBSCOhost, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, ACM Digital Library, and IEEE Xplore. Grey literature was also searched using PsycExtra, OpenGrey, British Library EThOS, and the British Library Catalogue. Databases were searched from inception until April (6th) 2021. Synthesis methods Searches undertaken across seven databases yielded 2145 articles. Forty studies met our review inclusion criteria of which 17 were randomized control trials. The methodological quality of studies was conducted with the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. A narrative synthesis summarised the findings. A meta-analysis was conducted with 12 RCTs. Results Most interventions used humanoid (67%) robotic platforms, were predominantly based in clinics (37%) followed home, schools and laboratory (17% respectively) environments and targeted at improving social and communication skills (77%). Focusing on the most common outcomes, a random effects meta-analysis of RCTs showed that robot-mediated interventions significantly improved social functioning (g = 0.35 [95%CI 0.09 to 0.61; k = 7). By contrast, robots did not improve emotional (g = 0.63 [95%CI -1.43 to 2.69]; k = 2) or motor outcomes (g = -0.10 [95%CI -1.08 to 0.89]; k = 3), but the numbers of trials were very small. Meta-regression revealed that age accounted for almost one-third of the variance in effect sizes, with greater benefits being found in younger children. Conclusions Overall, our findings support the use of robot-mediated interventions for autistic children and youth, and we propose several recommendations for future research to aid learning and enhance implementation in everyday settings.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85132529296&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0269800
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0269800
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0269800
M3 - Review article
C2 - 35731805
AN - SCOPUS:85132529296
SN - 1932-6203
VL - 17
JO - PLoS ONE
JF - PLoS ONE
IS - 6
M1 - e0269800
ER -