MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766935856 · doi:10.2196/resprot.8772

The Importance of Trust in the Adoption and Use of Intelligent Assistive Technology by Older Adults to Support Aging in Place: Scoping Review Protocol

2017· article· en· W2766935856 on OpenAlex
Josephine McMurray, Gillian Strudwick, Cheryl Forchuk, Adam Morse, Jessica LaChance, A Bustinduy Baskaran, Lauren H. Allison, Richard Booth

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology Use by Older Adults
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthUniversity Health NetworkWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAssistive technologyProtocol (science)Government (linguistics)Service (business)RobotHome automationIndependent livingAutomationGerontologyAging in placeComputer scienceKnowledge managementInternet privacyMedicineEngineeringHuman–computer interactionBusinessArtificial intelligenceTelecommunicationsMarketingAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Intelligent assistive technologies that complement and extend human abilities have proliferated in recent years. Service robots, home automation equipment, and other digital assistant devices possessing artificial intelligence are forms of assistive technologies that have become popular in society. Older adults (>55 years of age) have been identified by industry, government, and researchers as a demographic who can benefit significantly from the use of intelligent assistive technology to support various activities of daily living. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this scoping review is to summarize the literature on the importance of the concept of "trust" in the adoption of intelligent assistive technologies to assist aging in place by older adults. METHODS: Using a scoping review methodology, our search strategy will examine the following databases: ACM Digital Library, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Medline, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science. Two reviewers will independently screen the initial titles obtained from the search, and these results will be further inspected by other members of the research team for inclusion in the review. RESULTS: This review will provide insights into how the concept of trust is actualized in the adoption of intelligent assistive technology by older adults. Preliminary sensitization to the literature suggests that the concept of trust is fluid, unstable, and intimately tied to the type of intelligent assistive technology being examined. Furthermore, a wide range of theoretical lenses that include elements of trust have been used to examine this concept. CONCLUSIONS: This review will describe the concept of trust in the adoption of intelligent assistive technology by older adults, and will provide insights for practitioners, policy makers, and technology vendors for future practice.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.518
Threshold uncertainty score0.611

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.156
GPT teacher head0.553
Teacher spread0.396 · 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