Assistive Technology to Support Dementia Management: Protocol for a Scoping Review of Reviews
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: In Canada, more than 60% of persons living with dementia reside in their own homes, and over 25% rely heavily on their care partners (ie, family members or friends) for assistance with daily activities such as personal hygiene, eating, and walking. Assistive technology (AT) is a key dementia management strategy, helping to maintain health and social support in home and community settings. AT comprises assistive products and services required for safe and effective use. Persons living with dementia and their care partners often require multiple types of AT to maintain their needs, dignity, and autonomy. AT for dementia management is rapidly developing with abundant scientific literature, which can present a challenge to efficiently navigate and extract insights for policy and personal decision-making. OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to synthesize review-level evidence from published scientific literature on AT to support dementia management for persons living with dementia and their care partners in their homes and communities. Research gaps in knowledge and areas for further investigation into the use and access of AT will be identified. This review will provide an overview of AT types and characteristics and chart the outcomes and conclusions in review-level evidence. METHODS: This review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute's framework for conducting scoping reviews and the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. In total, 6 electronic databases will be searched. Articles will be screened according to the "Population-Concept-Context (PCC)" framework for eligible studies. Population includes persons living with dementia, their care partners, and health care professionals (eg, therapists or others who recommend AT). Concept includes AT and self-help devices of many types. Context includes homes and communities. A data charting template will guide data extraction, charting, and summarization. A descriptive numerical summary and an overview of the findings will be presented. Data, such as (1) article information (eg, author and year), (2) article characteristics (eg, review type), (3) AT types and characteristics, (4) setting and population characteristics, and (5) key review outcomes and conclusions, will be extracted. RESULTS: A total of 10,978 unique citations were identified across the 6 electronic databases. This review is in the full-text screening stage, which is expected to be completed by October 2024. CONCLUSIONS: This review will provide a comprehensive understanding and documentation of the published scientific literature on AT to support dementia management. Findings from this review are expected to provide evidence-based insights on the complexities of AT types, uses, availability, and access. The author group's diverse national and international perspectives may contribute to knowledge exchange and influence standards to improve the daily function, safety, and well-being of persons living with dementia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework DKSM9; https://osf.io/dksm9. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/57036.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,097 | 0,115 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,006 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,014 | 0,021 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,023 | 0,023 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,006 | 0,005 |
| Communication savante | 0,009 | 0,011 |
| Science ouverte | 0,006 | 0,010 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,008 | 0,009 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,115 | 0,020 |
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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».