An Internet of Things–Based Audio and Radio Connected System Supporting Older Adults With Physical and Cognitive Health Challenges: Qualitative Stakeholder-Informed Design Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Older adults managing chronic illnesses, such as cancer and Alzheimer disease and related dementias (ADRD), often experience significant physical or cognitive impairments that hinder daily activities and increase caregiver burden. Smart Internet of Things (IoT) technologies offer promising solutions by enabling passive monitoring, timely reminders, and personalized support at home. However, these technologies must be carefully tailored to accommodate users' individualized needs and preferences. OBJECTIVE: This formative qualitative study aimed to explore stakeholder perspectives, including patients, caregivers, health care providers, and technical experts, on the use of smart home-based IoT systems to support chronic illness management. The goal was to inform the early development of the audio and radio connected (AURA) system, an IoT prototype integrating Wi-Fi sensing, wearable trackers, and voice-assistive features. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with 6 patients who underwent postostomy creation for colorectal or bladder cancer treatment and 5 patients with ADRD and their caregivers. Input from additional stakeholders, including 2 health care providers, 2 community health workers, and 2 computer scientists, was also included in the report. Stakeholders reviewed a demonstration video depicting the conceptual features of the AURA system. Interviews explored stakeholders' needs and preferences for using such systems. Thematic analysis was guided by the extended Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 (UTAUT2) framework, with 5 adapted constructs: performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions, and hedonic motivation and habit. RESULTS: Stakeholders identified distinct yet complementary needs across populations. Patients with cancer emphasized physical health monitoring, integration with health care systems, and customization; ADRD stakeholders prioritized routine support, emotional engagement, and simplicity; caregivers and clinicians emerged as key influencers of adoption. Barriers included privacy concerns, technology literacy, and fatigue, while facilitators included perceived caregiving support, streamlined interfaces, and electronic health record integration. Patients with cancer focused on motivational cues for physical activity, while emotional engagement and habit were more prominent for ADRD users. CONCLUSIONS: Stakeholder insights underscore the importance of designing adaptable, user-centered IoT systems that reflect the varied capabilities and care needs of older adults with chronic illnesses. These findings informed the design of the AURA prototype and highlighted theoretical considerations for technology acceptance in health care. Future work will test AURA in real-world settings to evaluate usability, acceptability, and clinical relevance.
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 | 0,019 | 0,013 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,006 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 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 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 ».