Comparison of Mobile Health Technology Use for Self-Tracking Between Older Adults and the General Adult Population in Canada: Cross-Sectional Survey
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The burden of population aging and chronic conditions has been reported worldwide. Older adults, especially those with high needs, experience social isolation and have high rates of emergency visits and limited satisfaction with the care they receive. Mobile health (mHealth) technologies present opportunities to address these challenges. To date, limited information is available on Canadian older adults' attitudes toward and use of mHealth technologies for self-tracking purposes-an area that is increasingly important and relevant during the COVID-19 era. OBJECTIVE: This study presents contributions to an underresearched area on older adults and mHealth technology use. The aim of this study was to compare older adults' use of mHealth technologies to that of the general adult population in Canada and to investigate the factors that affect their use. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey on mHealth and digital self-tracking was conducted. A web-based questionnaire was administered to a national sample of 4109 Canadian residents who spoke either English or French. The survey instrument consisted of 3 sections assessing the following items: (1) demographic characteristics, health status, and comorbidities; (2) familiarity with and use of mHealth technologies (ie, mobile apps, consumer smart devices/wearables such as vital signs monitors, bathroom scales, fitness trackers, intelligent clothing); and (3) factors influencing the continued use of mHealth technologies. RESULTS: Significant differences were observed between the older adults and the general adult population in the use of smart technologies and internet (P<.001). Approximately 47.4% (323/682) of the older adults in the community reported using smartphones and 49.8% (340/682) indicated using digital tablets. Only 19.6% (91/463) of the older adults using smartphones/digital tablets reported downloading mobile apps, and 12.3% (47/383) of the older adults who heard of smart devices/wearables indicated using them. The majority of the mobile apps downloaded by older adults was health-related; interestingly, their use was sustained over a longer period of time (P=.007) by the older adults compared to that by the general population. Approximately 62.7% (428/682) of the older adults reported tracking their health measures, but the majority did so manually. Older adults with one or more chronic conditions were mostly nontrackers (odds ratio 0.439 and 0.431 for traditional trackers and digital trackers, respectively). No significant differences were observed between the older adults and the general adult population with regard to satisfaction with mHealth technologies and their intention to continue using them. CONCLUSIONS: Leveraging mHealth technologies in partnership with health care providers and sharing of health/well-being data with health care professionals and family members remain very limited. A culture shift in the provision of care to older adults is deemed necessary to keep up with the development of mHealth technologies and the changing demographics and expectations of patients and their caregivers.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».