The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Utilization of Robotic Pets in Dementia Care
Abstract
Background: Behavioral problems may affect individuals with dementia, increasing the cost and burden of care. Pet therapy has been known to be emotionally beneficial for many years. Robotic pets have been shown to have similar positive effects without the negative aspects of traditional pets. Robotic pet therapy offers an alternative to traditional pet therapy. Objective: The study rigorously assesses the effectiveness of the PARO robotic pet, an FDA approved biofeedback device, in treating dementia-related symptoms. Methods: A randomized block design with repeated measurements guided the study. Before and after measures included reliable, valid tools such as: RAID, CSDD, GDS, pulse rate, pulse oximetry, and GSR. Participants interacted with the PARO robotic pet, and the control group received standard activity programs. Five urban secure dementia units comprised the setting. Results: 61 patients, with 77% females, average 83.4 years in age, were randomized into control and treatment groups. Compared to the control group, RAID, CSDD, GSR, and pulse oximetry were increased in the treatment group, while pulse rate, pain medication, and psychoactive medication use were decreased. The changes in GSR, pulse oximetry, and pulse rate over time were plotted for both groups. The difference between groups was consistent throughout the 12-week study for pulse oximetry and pulse rate, while GSR had several weeks when changes were similar between groups. Conclusions: Treatment with the PARO robot decreased stress and anxiety in the treatment group and resulted in reductions in the use of psychoactive medications and pain medications in elderly clients with dementia.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In dementia care, robotic pets were associated with reduced agitation, increased comfort, improved interaction, and greater engagement, although effects on depression, anxiety, quality of life, and long-term well-being were inconsistent.
“In dementia care, robotic pets were associated with reduced agitation, increased comfort, improved interaction, and greater engagement, although effects on depression, anxiety, quality of life, and long-term well-being were inconsistent [14,25,26,28,29,35,38,47].”
From The Effectiveness of Artificial Intelligence-Based Pet Therapy in Improving the Care of Patients: A Systematic Review (2026) · cites this paper as [25]
Broader outcomes such as reduced loneliness and higher caregiver satisfaction support the nonpharmacological value of robotic pets.
“broader outcomes, such as reduced loneliness and higher caregiver satisfaction, support their nonpharmacological value [14,25,28,35,36,47].”
From The Effectiveness of Artificial Intelligence-Based Pet Therapy in Improving the Care of Patients: A Systematic Review (2026) · cites this paper as [25]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Yu, R., Hui, E., Lee, J., Poon, D., Ng, A., Sit, K., Ip, K., Yeung, F., Wong, M., Shibata, T., et al. (2015) · JMIR Research Protocols · doi:10.2196/resprot.4189 · Cited by 159 · cited 1×
“For example, as many as 83% of individuals with dementia suffer with depression [2]; and as many as 77% suffer from anxiety [3].”
Background
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 13
- 10.1038/nrneurol.2011.60 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1440-1630.2004.00442.x · DOI
- 10.4017/gt.2009.08.02.002.00 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jamda.2010.10.002 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/13607869956424 · DOI
- 10.1080/08039480600937066 · DOI
- HerndonR (2006) Handbook of Neurologic Rating Scales (2nd ed.) Demos Medical Publishing New York.
- EisdorferC, CohenD, PavezaG, AshfordJ, LuchinsD, GorelickP, HirschmanR, FreelsS, LevyP, SemlaT, ShawH (1992) An empirical evaluation of the Global Deterioration Scale for staging Alzheimer’s disease. Am J Psychiatry 149, 190–194.
- 10.1007/978-1-4757-5093-5 · DOI · Paper page
- SternR, RayW, QuigleyK (2001) Psychophysiological Recording, 2nd ed, Oxford University Press, New York.
- SithamparanathanK, SaderaA, LeungL (2012) Adverse effects of benzodiazepine use in elderly people: A meta-analysis. Asian J Gerontol Geriatr 7, 107–111.
- GareriP, Segura-GarcíaC, GraziellaV, ManfrediL, BruniA, CiambroneP, CerminaraG, De SarroG, De FazioP (2014) Use of atypical antipsychotics in the elderly: A clinical review. Clin Interv Aging 9, 1363–1373.
- 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2013.08.004 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Scoping review on the use of socially assistive robot technology in elderly care
Abdi, J., Al-Hindawi, A., Ng, T., & Vizcaychipi, M. P. (2018) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018815 · Cited by 583
Moyle, W., Jones, C. J., Murfield, J. E., Thalib, L., Beattie, E. R. A., Shum, D. K. H., O'Dwyer, S. T., Mervin, M. C., & Draper, B. M. (2017) · Journal of the American Medical Directors Association · doi:10.1016/j.jamda.2017.03.018 · Cited by 284
Krick, T., Huter, K., Domhoff, D., Schmidt, A., Rothgang, H., & Wolf-Ostermann, K. (2019) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-019-4238-3 · Cited by 279
Effectiveness of an Empathic Chatbot in Combating Adverse Effects of Social Exclusion on Mood
de Gennaro, M., Krumhuber, E. G., & Lucas, G. (2020) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03061 · Cited by 265
Yu, C., Sommerlad, A., Sakure, L., & Livingston, G. (2022) · Ageing Research Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.arr.2022.101633 · Cited by 131
“Anxiety Three RCTs examined PARO ’ s immediate effects on anxiety, (Moyle et al., 2013a; Petersen et al., 2017; Pu et al., 2020) two with usual care and one compared to a reading group.”
BackgroundInfluentialConversational Affective Social Robots for Ageing and Dementia Support
Lima, M. R., Wairagkar, M., Gupta, M., Rodriguez y Baena, F., Barnaghi, P., Sharp, D. J., & Vaidyanathan, R. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Cognitive and Developmental Systems · doi:10.1109/tcds.2021.3115228 · Cited by 75
Vogan, A. A., Alnajjar, F., Gochoo, M., & Khalid, S. (2020) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2020.2966819 · Cited by 63
Robotic Telemedicine for Mental Health: A Multimodal Approach to Improve Human-Robot Engagement
Lima, M. R., Wairagkar, M., Natarajan, N., Vaitheswaran, S., & Vaidyanathan, R. (2021) · Frontiers in Robotics and AI · doi:10.3389/frobt.2021.618866 · Cited by 64
Bradwell, H. L., Edwards, K., Shenton, D., Winnington, R., Thill, S., & Jones, R. B. (2021) · JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies · doi:10.2196/30337 · Cited by 54
Villarreal-Zegarra, D., Yllescas-Panta, T., Malaquias-Obregon, S., Dámaso-Román, A., & Mayo-Puchoc, N. (2024) · Complementary Therapies in Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.ctim.2024.103023 · Cited by 29
Du, H., Bo, L., Lai, X., Zhu, H., & Huo, X. (2023) · Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnagi.2023.1095996 · Cited by 10
Trajbarič, T., Muršec, D., Svenšek, A., Štiglic, G., & Gosak, L. (2026) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app16104683
Metadata
- Authors
- Petersen, S., Houston, S., Qin, H., Tague, C., & Studley, J.
- Affiliations
- The University of Texas at Tyler
- Baylor Scott & White Health Care System Office of the CNO
- Baylor Scott & White Health Care System
- ACH Health Services
- Baylor Elder HouseCalls
- Venue
- Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2016-10-01
- Volume
- 55
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 569-574
- ISSN
- 1387-2877
- 1875-8908
- PMC
- PMC5181659
- Cited by
- 283
- References
- 1
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
