MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7047590113

The impact of assistive devices on community-dwelling older adults and their informal caregivers

2023· dissertation· en· W7047590113 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2023
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomainePhysics and Astronomy
ThématiqueSuperconducting and THz Device Technology
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésQuality of life (healthcare)Aging in placeActivities of daily livingTracking (education)Life satisfactionHealthy agingLongitudinal studyLife course approachActivity tracker
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background \nCanadians are aging and living longer with chronic conditions, multimorbidity, and disabilities, which can have negative impacts on the health and quality of life of both older adults and their informal caregivers. Assistive devices (AD) can be beneficial to community-dwelling older adults and their informal caregivers; however, researchers have not investigated all outcomes of using AD. Two under-investigated outcomes in aging populations are: (a) the change in life satisfaction (LS) over time, and (b) the change in the number of informal caregiving hours received over time. The Consortium for Assistive Technology Outcome Research (CATOR) framework was used to frame the following objectives, which identifies LS and the amount of informal caregiving hours received as key outcomes of AD use. \nObjectives \nThe objectives of this thesis were addressed via three studies: Study 1 (Chapter 3) examined existing evidence on the associations between (a) AD use and LS, and (b) AD use and informal caregiving hours received; Study 2 (Chapter 4) and Study 3 (Chapter 5) investigated the associations between self-reported AD use within the past 12 months (assessed at baseline) and: (a) the change in LS over time (three-years), (b) the change in informal caregiving hours received over time (three-years), respectively. All studies focused on community-dwelling older adults aged 65 years or older. \nMethods \nStudy 1 consisted of a systematic review adhering to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Studies 2 and 3 used unweighted data from the Tracking and Comprehensive cohorts of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA) and multiple linear regression models to investigate the associations between AD use and the change in LS or informal caregiver time. The regression analyses controlled for comprehensive sets of covariates. \nResults \nStudy 1 suggested AD use was not linked with LS and was associated with reductions in informal caregiving hours. However, due to the scarcity of existing studies, their limitations (e.g., high risk of bias, residual confounding, cross-sectional nature), and very low or moderate strength of evidence, conclusions about the associations of interest could not be drawn with certainty. Results from Study 2 did not find evidence of an association between AD use and increases in LS over time, after accounting for covariates (Tracking: n = 5,502, β = 1.16, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] = -0.57 to 2.89; Comprehensive: n = 9,760, β = 0.47, 95% CI = -0.89 to 1.82). Similarly, after controlling for covariates, Study 3 did not find associations between AD use and changes in informal caregiving hours received over time (Tracking: n = 236, β = 3.10, 95% CI = -77.98 to 84.17; Comprehensive: n = 420, β = -5.05, 95% CI = -47.19 to 37.09). \nConclusion \nIn an aging society, empirical evidence regarding the effects of AD on the changes in LS and informal caregiver hours is imperative for evidence-based decision-making and effective recommendations on the provision of AD to older adults. Although the findings of this thesis were non-significant, null findings can be informative because they can contribute to guiding future studies, informing existing theories, and avoiding misleading research conclusions or biased evidence-based practices and policies. \nTo overcome the limitations of existing studies, future research should aim to extend beyond three years, use large sample sizes, conduct analyses based on the type of AD used (e.g., mobility versus vision-related AD) and the duration of AD use (e.g., short, long, intermittent use), and control for additional potential confounders (e.g., device satisfaction, time-varying confounders). LS questions should be specifically tailored to AD use and informal caregivers should be directly interviewed to promote the accuracy of data on informal caregiving hours. Data sets designed to collect information primarily on AD should be used in future investigations to address the research questions in this thesis. These data sets should ideally be culturally representative and have minimal bias (e.g., selection bias, missing data) to assure reliability and generalizability of the findings. \nThis thesis further highlighted various implications for future research, theory, policy and practice. These implications included the complexity of research questions and concepts (i.e., life satisfaction, accurate capture of informal caregiving hours from care receivers and caregivers), overcoming limitations of existing studies, the importance of stratified analysis to inform sub-theories in the CATOR framework, integration of evidence from multiple sources (e.g., experimental studies), funding for improved research, recognition of null findings, and collaborative efforts among stakeholders to make informed decisions related to AD use among community-dwelling older adults.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,019
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,038

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,011
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0020,001
Science ouverte0,0000,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,011
Tête enseignante GPT0,225
Écart entre enseignants0,215 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Même sujetSuperconducting and THz Device TechnologyTravaux en français237 207