Abstract
Abstract
Background
Cardiometabolic diseases (CMDs) are a major health concern worldwide, with people living in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas being disproportionately affected. Knowing one’s risk status for developing a CMD can help individuals in delaying or preventing the disease. Innovative tools and strategies such as the use of AI-based technology are needed to improve inclusivity, cost-effectiveness, and sustainability of screening processes.
Objective
This study aimed to assess users’ perceptions of the usability and acceptance of the social robot “Furhat” for cardiometabolic risk assessment within a socioeconomically disadvantaged community in Uppsala, Sweden.
Methods
In this qualitative study, 13 semistructured interviews were conducted with participants living in socially disadvantaged areas within Uppsala, after they completed a CMD risk assessment delivered by the social robot. The study was conducted in one of the socioeconomically disadvantaged areas in Uppsala from October 19 to 26, 2023. Participants were purposefully sampled at different community events via phone or on the street to achieve the desired variation regarding personal characteristics such as age, gender, or area of living. The used interview guide for this study consisted of questions regarding the demographics, participants’ experiences with the robot screening, and suggestions for improvements. A framework analysis approach was applied to the data.
Results
Two themes were developed. The first theme
Self-versus-others: a matter of perception, norms, and assumptions
includes participants’ perceptions of who would use the robot and why, if it was installed in the community. Participants perceived older individuals, immigrants, and, in some instances, women to be less interested in the robot screening or as having a harder time participating in it. However, there were between-group variations, especially among men and women, with participants often discounting opinions ascribed to their group by others. The second theme
The robot is good, but humans are better
captures participants’ actual experiences of the interaction with the social robot once they have started the interaction. Although participants enjoyed the interaction with the robot, perceived it as nonjudgmental, and would recommend it to others, most would prefer conducting the screening with a human. Two major contributors for this preference were language barriers experienced during the robot-participant interaction, as well as their wish for more interactive, emotionally responsive, and communicative features of the robot.
Conclusions
This study provides insights into users’ perceptions of the usability and acceptance of a social robot for risk assessment in a community context, which can help inform the further development of this technology for health screening in a community context. In the future, the robot could be further developed to conduct risk assessments in multiple languages and offer a broader service to users, such as providing appropriate information related to healthy and active living.