1. This article outlines a scoping review protocol to investigate the use of telepresence robots in aged care settings to reduce social isolation and loneliness.
2. The review team consists of patient partners, family partners, a nurse researcher and students.
3. The scoping review will consider studies of using a telepresence robotic technology with older adults in care settings (ie, LTC and hospital), published in English.
The article is written by Chelsea Smith, Mario Gregorio, and Lillian Hung who are all qualified researchers in the field of geriatric medicine and mental health. The article is well-structured and provides an overview of the research protocol for the scoping review as well as information on the team conducting it. The authors have also provided information on how they plan to search for relevant literature and ethical considerations related to their study.
The article does not appear to be biased or one-sided as it presents both the potential benefits of using telepresence robots in aged care settings as well as potential risks associated with their use such as privacy concerns or technical issues that may arise during use. Furthermore, the authors have noted that this scoping review will only consider studies published in English which could limit its scope and lead to potential bias due to language barriers or cultural differences between countries where English is not spoken natively.
The article does not appear to contain any promotional content or unsupported claims; however, there are some missing points of consideration such as how telepresence robots can be used effectively in home settings rather than just care settings which could provide further insight into their use for reducing social isolation among older adults. Additionally, there is no mention of counterarguments or alternative solutions that could be used instead of telepresence robots which could provide further insight into their effectiveness for reducing social isolation among older adults.
In conclusion, this article appears to be trustworthy and reliable overall; however, there are some missing points of consideration that should be addressed before drawing any conclusions from this research protocol.