Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Telepresence Robot Use for Children with Chronic Illness in Australian Schools: A Scoping Review and Thematic Analysis

  • Published:
International Journal of Social Robotics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Around the world there has been growing interest in the use of technologies to connect students who are absent from school because of a health or medical condition to their teachers and peers in school. In this article findings are presented from a scoping review which sought to map the impacts of telepresence robots (TPR) for students who miss school because of illness. In Australia, TPRs are being piloted across the country in efforts to address the isolation of students with chronic illness. However, there is very little research internationally and no research in Australia that maps the potential and issues associated with students who are connected to their classrooms through TPRs. Therefore, research-based guidance regarding how best to direct the successful implementation of TPRs is required. Findings from the limited research available suggest that TPRs can enable positive experiences in education and can foster the social development of chronically-ill students; improvements to the design of TPRs are still required to maximise educational and social benefits; there is a need for appropriate professional learning for teachers in engaging with students through TPRs and for planning between all stakeholders; and, finally, issues of privacy and possible negative reactions from all parties involved need to be addressed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material

Not applicable.

References

  1. Ahumada-Newhart V, Olson JS (2019) Going to school on a robot: robot and user interface design features that matter. ACM Trans Comput Human Interact 26(4):1–28. https://doi.org/10.1145/3325210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. ARACY (2015) Full report: School Connection for Seriously Sick Kids: Who are They, How do we Know what Works, and Whose Job is it? Australian Research Alliance for Children and Youth, Canberra, Australia

  3. Arksey H, O’Malley L (2005) Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol 8(1):19–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Australian Curriculum Authority (2012) The Australian Curriculum. Australian Government, Sydney, Australia. https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/

  5. Barber S, Gronholm P, Ahuja S, Rüsch N, Thornicroft G (2020) Microaggressions towards people affected by mental health problems: a scoping review. Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci 29:1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Beeman RY, Henderson CJ (2012) Video-conferencing technology brings a homebound middle grades student to the classroom: educators and parents collaborate to connect a homebound student with his classmates using two-way video technology. Middle School Journal 43(5):26–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/00940771.2012.11461826

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Belton P (2018) My robot makes me feel like i haven’t been forgotten. BBC News, U.K

  8. Braun V, Clarke V (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 3(2):77–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cha E, Chen S, Mataric MJ (2017) Designing telepresence robots for K-12 education. In: 2017 26th IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN), IEEE, pp 683–688

  10. Cooper S, Cant R, Kelly M, Levett-Jones T, McKenna L, Seaton P, Bogossian F (2019) An evidence-based checklist for improving scoping review quality. Clin Nurs Res. https://doi.org/10.1177/1054773819846024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Fels DI, Waalen JK, Zhai S, Weiss PL (2001) Telepresence under exceptional circumstances: enriching the connection to school for sick children. In: INTERACT, pp 617–624

  12. Fels DI, Weiss PLT (2001) Video-mediated communication in the classroom to support sick children: a case study. Int J Ind Ergon 28(5):251–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Gan LL, Lum A, Wakefield CE, Nandakumar B, Fardell JE (2017) School experiences of siblings of children with chronic illness: a systematic literature review. J Pediatr Nurs 33:23–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedn.2016.11.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gilmore M, Meyers G (2018) Telepresence robots: Building better practice for connecting students with serious illness or injury to their classrooms. https://ddwa.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Telepresence-Robots-MissingSchool_InfoPack_2pp_WEB-1.pdf

  15. Green J, Vetere F, Nisselle A, Xuan T, Peng P (2010) Ambient orb technology: fostering presence and awareness of children absent from school. In: Australian Association for research in education conference

  16. Greenberg L, Webster G, Stojanovska M (2017) School refusal: every school day counts. South Eastern Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, Australia

  17. Guryan J, Christenson S, Claessens A, Engel M, Lai I, Ludwig J, Turner M (2017) The effect of mentoring on school attendance and academic outcomes: a randomized evaluation of the Check and Connect Program. Institute for Policy Research Working Paper Series, WP-16-18 Evanston, IL: Northwestern University http://www.iprnorthwesternedu/publications/docs/workingpapers/2016/WP-16-18pdf

  18. Hancock KJ, Shepherd CC, Lawrence D, Zubrick SR (2013) Student attendance and educational outcomes: every day counts. Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations, Canberra, Australia

  19. Kristoffersson A, Coradeschi S, Loutfi A (2013) A review of mobile robotic telepresence. Adv Human-Comput Inter 2013:3. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/902316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Lawrence D, Johnson S, Hafekost J, Boterhoven de Haan K, Sawyer M, Ainley J, Zubrick SR (2015) The mental health of children and adolescents: report on the second Australian child and adolescent survey of mental health and wellbeing. Australian Government, Canberra, Australia

  21. Learning Technology (2019) What are Telepresence robots? https://t4l.schools.nsw.gov.au/news/2019/4/article4.html

  22. Libbey HP (2004) Measuring student relationships to school: attachment, bonding, connectedness, and engagement. J Sch Health 74(7):274–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Lister T (2020) Meaningful engagement via robotic telepresence: an exploratory case study. Curr Issues Emerg eLearn 6(1):6

    Google Scholar 

  24. Lum A, Wakefield C, Donnan B, Burns M, Fardell J, Marshall G (2017) Understanding the school experiences of children and adolescents with serious chronic illness: a systematic meta-review. Childcare Health Dev 43(5):645–662. https://doi.org/10.1111/cch.12475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. McCormack M (2017) Queensland School Student Brodie Mullin ‘Back in the Classroom’ Thanks to Robot. The Courier Mail, Queensland, Australia

  26. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group P (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 6(7):e1000097

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Newhart VA, Olson JS (2017) My student is a robot: How schools manage telepresence experiences for students. In: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 2017. ACM, pp 342–347

  28. Newhart VA, Olson JS (2017) Social rules for going to school on a robot. In: Workshop on robots in groups and teams. https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.2.17026.38081

  29. Newhart VA, Warschauer M, Jones M, Eccles J (2018) Telepresence robots improve social connectedness for homebound pediatric patients. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/21k8q4w6

  30. Newhart VA, Warschauer M, Sender L (2016) Virtual inclusion via telepresence robots in the classroom: an exploratory case study. Int J Technol Learn 23(4):9–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Ni Mhurchadha S, O’Sullivan A (2017) The chronic illness experience in children and adolescents. https://healthcare.report/Resources/Whitepapers/bb38acc5-f90d-41ef-ba39- 3ae9bb2ff79d_The_Chronic_Illness_Experience_in_Children.pdf

  32. No Isolation (2018) The impact of AV1 on children with long-term illness and absence. http://www.noisolation.com/global/research/the-impact-of-av1-on-children-with-long-term-illness-and-absence/

  33. Peters MD, Godfrey CM, Khalil H, McInerney P, Parker D, Soares CB (2015) Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. Int J Evidence-based Healthcare 13(3):141–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Soares N, Kay JC, Craven G (2017) Mobile robotic telepresence solutions for the education of hospitalized children. In: Perspectives in Health Information Management 1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5653953/

  35. The Robots Project (n.d.). https://www.canteen.org.au/research/robots-project/

  36. Tollit M, Politis J, Knight S (2018) Measuring school functioning in students with chronic fatigue syndrome: a systematic review. J Sch Health 88(1):74–89. https://doi.org/10.1111/josh.12580

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. UNESCO (1989) United Nations Convention of the Rights of the Child, United Nations

  38. Wadley G, Vetere F, Hopkins L, Green J, Kulik L (2014) Exploring ambient technology for connecting hospitalised children with school and home. Int J Hum Comput Stud 72(8–9):640–653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2014.04.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Weibel M, Nielsen MKF, Topperzer MK, Hammer NM, Møller SW, Schmiegelow K, Bækgaard Larsen H (2020) Back to school with telepresence robot technology: a qualitative pilot study about how telepresence robots help school-aged children and adolescents with cancer to remain socially and academically connected with their school classes during treatment. Nurs Open. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Weiss PLT, Whiteley CP, Treviranus J, Fels DI (2001) PEBBLES: A personal technology for meeting educational, social and emotional needs of hospitalised children. Pers Ubiquit Comput 5(3):157–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. White J (2015) Students with chronic health conditions, the law and education: a salutary lesson from Australia. Int J Inclusive Educ 19(12):1294–1306. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2015.1057242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Williams LA, Fels DI, Smith G, Treviranus J, Eagleson R (1997) PEBBLES: providing education by bringing learning environments to students. Adv Hum Factors 3:115–118

    Google Scholar 

  43. Yeung J, Fels DI (2005) A remote telepresence system for high school classrooms. In: Canadian conference on electrical and computer engineering, 2005. IEEE, pp 1465–1468

Download references

Funding

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Angela Page.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

There are no conflict of interest identified.

Code availability

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

See Table 1.

Table 1 Data extracted from the included studies

1.1 Appendix 2

See Table 2.

Table 2 Telepresence robot specifications extracted from the included studies

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Page, A., Charteris, J. & Berman, J. Telepresence Robot Use for Children with Chronic Illness in Australian Schools: A Scoping Review and Thematic Analysis. Int J of Soc Robotics 13, 1281–1293 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-020-00714-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-020-00714-0

Keywords

Navigation