Development of an ethical framework for the use of social robots in the care of individuals with major neurocognitive disorders: a qualitative study
This qualitative study investigates how healthcare professionals perceive and approach ethical issues surrounding the use of social robots in geriatric care for individuals with major neurocognitive disorders. Through semi-structured interviews with 20 professionals in geriatric facilities, the authors identified six core themes covering institutional integration, session preparation, robot introduction, consent and assent, supervision, and observed effects. The study provides preliminary ethical guidelines and practical recommendations for healthcare management and clinical staff to ensure responsible implementation of social robot interventions.
Summary and content fields are drawn from the document text and are pending editorial review.
Who issued it
Who it governs
Healthcare professionals, facility managers, and researchers seeking ethical guidance on implementing social robot interventions in geriatric care.
What the document contains
The document addresses the ethical, practical, and clinical considerations of deploying social robots in geriatric care facilities for older adults with major neurocognitive disorders, including patient selection, consent procedures, human mediation, and mitigation of infantilization.
It does not provide binding legal regulations or statutory enforcement mechanisms for social robot manufacturers, nor does it establish technical certification standards for artificial intelligence software.
- Social robot interventions in geriatric care require careful integration, resource planning, and comprehensive staff training beyond basic technical operation.
- Distinguishing between formal consent and ongoing nonverbal assent is essential when conducting robotic interventions with individuals suffering from major neurocognitive disorders.
- The way a robot is presented heavily influences patient perception, and professionals must frame robots as therapeutic tools to avoid infantilization.
- Social robots should serve as complementary tools for therapeutic mediation rather than replacements for human caregivers.
- Technical malfunctions and delays can be successfully managed by healthcare professionals using humor and improvisation to maintain engagement and reduce distress.
· Introduction · Materials and methods · Results · Discussion · Conclusion and future work
How it scores
Each score is backed by a quote verified against the document text. Editorial review has not yet confirmed them.
Accountability
3/5Clear responsibility for AI outcomes
the robot must remain under the healthcare provider’s control […] It’s a tool among other therapies.
Ensuring Human Supervision and Mediation in Social Robot Interventions
screening score · 2026-10-24
Fairness
0/5Non-discrimination and equitable treatment
None
screening score · 2026-10-24
Human Oversight
4/5Humans remain in control of consequential decisions
We never leave a patient with dementia alone with these technologies [social robots].
Navigating Technical Issues in Social Robot Interventions
screening score · 2026-10-24
Privacy
1/5Protection of personal data and private life
and protecting personal data [18].
Introduction
screening score · 2026-10-24
Transparency
3/5Openness about how AI systems work and are used
Professionals unanimously agreed that the robot should be presented transparently, with a clear explanation of its nature and purpose.
Introducing the robot to older adults
screening score · 2026-10-24
Enforcement
0/5Consequences and compliance mechanisms with real force
None
screening score · 2026-10-24
Impact Assessment
2/5Required assessment of an AI system's risks/impacts before or during use
Professionals emphasized the need to evaluate the human resources required to implement SRIs before integrating robots into institutions.
Deciding on and preparing the robot’s integration into an institutional setting
screening score · 2026-10-24