Using a Proactive Telecare System to Support Independence, Health, and Well-Being in Older Adults: Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Proactive telecare offers services designed to reduce the occurrence of emergency situations by delivering proactive outbound calls and follow-ups and providing information and advice. By engaging regularly with users, proactive telecare may foster social connections with older adults and enable the detection of changes in needs. Telecare systems that promote active participation among older adults may also foster feelings of autonomy and self-management. Objective: This study aimed to (1) explore the acceptability and feasibility of delivering and evaluating a proactive telecare intervention to community-dwelling older adults prior to a potential effectiveness trial and (2) evaluate the proposed eligibility criteria and estimate the potential effect size of the impact of the intervention on health and well-being outcomes to inform sample size calculations for a future trial. Methods: An 8-week randomized pre-post feasibility study was conducted. Using a mixed methods approach, questionnaires and semistructured interviews were used to explore the feasibility and acceptability of the study. The proactive telecare system encouraged users to press an OK button once a day to confirm their well-being. If they did not respond, participants received a well-being check, and emergency contacts were notified if required. Outcomes associated with independence, health, and well-being were measured using standardized questionnaires, including health-related quality of life, mental health, and loneliness. Results: Thirty older adults were recruited, with 13 randomized into the intervention group and 17 into the control group. The mean (SD) age of the participants was 75.4 (5.2) years; 66.7% (20/30) of the participants recruited had more than one health condition. This study achieved high retention rates (30/33, 90.9%); however, the expression of interest rate was low (52/295, 17.6%), indicating that changes to recruitment strategies are required. Effect sizes for all quantitative outcomes were small (approximately 0.2). Participants demonstrated high acceptance of the intervention, with the primary benefit cited as providing reassurance and promoting autonomy. Proactive engagement encouraged self-regulation and allowed users to control the level of support received. Those who were socially isolated reported feeling less lonely because of having additional social contact. Most participants felt the intervention would be particularly beneficial if they were experiencing poor health that significantly affected their daily activities, suggesting it may be more suited to those with limited independence. Some participants expressed anxiety about using the technology, primarily due to a lack of understanding and uncertainty in their perceived need for the device. Conclusions: This proactive telecare system is feasible to deliver within a cohort of older adults living in the community. However, changes to recruitment approaches and implementation are needed to ensure acceptability and target numbers are achieved in a future effectiveness trial.
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 | 0,009 | 0,008 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,008 | 0,001 |
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 ».