Monitoring the Well-being of Older People by Energy Usage Patterns: Systematic Review of the Literature and Evidence Synthesis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Due to the aging population, there is a need for monitoring well-being and safety while living independently. A low-intrusive monitoring system is based on a person's use of energy or water. OBJECTIVE: The study's objective was to provide a systematic overview of studies that monitor the health and well-being of older people using energy (eg, electricity and gas) and water usage data and study the outcomes on health and well-being. METHODS: CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE (Ovid), Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched systematically from inception until November 8, 2021. The inclusion criteria were that the study had to be published in English, have full-text availability, target independent-living people aged 60 years and older from the general population, have an observational design, and assess the outcomes of a monitoring system based on energy (ie, electricity, gas, or water) usage on well-being and safety. The quality of the studies was assessed by the QualSyst systematic review tool. RESULTS: The search strategy identified 2920 articles. The majority of studies focused on the technical algorithms underlying energy usage data and related sensors. One study was included in this review. This study reported that the smart energy meter data monitoring system was considered unobtrusive and was well accepted by the older people and professionals involved. Energy usage in a household acted as a unique signature and therefore provided useful insight into well-being and safety. This study lacked statistical power due to the small number of participants and the low number of observed events. In addition, the quality of the study was rated as low. CONCLUSIONS: This review identified only 1 study that evaluated the impact of an energy usage monitoring system on the well-being and safety of older people. The absence of reliable evidence impedes any definitive guidance or recommendations for practice. Because this emerging field has not yet been studied thoroughly, many questions remain open for further research. Future studies should focus on the further development of a monitoring system and the evaluation of the implementation and outcomes of these systems. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42022245713; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=245713.
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 | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| 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 | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| 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 ».