MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2602084977 · doi:10.2196/ijmr.4447

Using eHealth Technologies: Interests, Preferences, and Concerns of Older Adults

2017· article· en· W2602084977 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Patrick Ware, Susan J. Bartlett, Guy Paré, Iphigenia Symeonidis, Cara Tannenbaum, Gillian Bartlett, Lise Poissant, Sara Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueInteractive Journal of Medical Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsCentre de réadaptation Lethbridge-Layton-MackayUniversité de MontréalInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de MontréalMcGill University Health CentreMcGill UniversityHEC MontréalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordseHealthThematic analysisInternet privacyThe InternetPatient portalHealth careHealth informaticsHealth Information National Trends SurveyPsychologyPublic relationsHealth informationNursingMedicineQualitative researchWorld Wide WebPublic healthSociologyComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Internet and eHealth technologies represent new opportunities for managing health. Age, sex, socioeconomic status, and current technology use are some of the known factors that influence individuals' uptake of eHealth; however, relatively little is known about facilitators and barriers to eHealth uptake specific to older adults, particularly as they relate to their experiences in accessing health care. OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to explore the interests, preferences, and concerns of older adults in using the Internet and eHealth technologies for managing their health in relation to their experiences with the current health care system. METHODS: Two focus groups (n=15) were conducted with adults aged 50+ years. Pragmatic thematic analysis using an inductive approach was conducted to identify the interests, preferences, and concerns of using the Internet and eHealth technologies. RESULTS: Five themes emerged that include (1) Difficulty in identifying credible and relevant sources of information on the Web; (2) Ownership, access, and responsibility for medical information; (3) Peer communication and support; (4) Opportunities to enhance health care interactions; and (5) Privacy concerns. These findings support the potential value older adults perceive in eHealth technologies, particularly in their ability to provide access to personal health information and facilitate communication between providers and peers living with similar conditions. However, in order to foster acceptance, these technologies will need to provide personal and general health information that is secure, readily accessible, and easily understood. CONCLUSIONS: Older adults have diverse needs and preferences that, in part, are driven by their experiences and frustrations with the health care system. Results can help inform the design and implementation of technologies to address gaps in care and access to health information for older adults with chronic conditions who may benefit the most from this approach.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.330
GPT teacher head0.641
Teacher spread0.311 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations162
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInteractive Journal of Medical ResearchSame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207