MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963388717 · doi:10.2196/12346

Adapting Mobile and Wearable Technology to Provide Support and Monitoring in Rehabilitation for Dementia: Feasibility Case Series

2019· article· en· W2963388717 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Julia Rosemary Thorpe, Birgitte Hysse Forchhammer, Anja Maier

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRigshospitalet
KeywordsWearable computerWearable technologyDementiaContext (archaeology)SmartwatchApplied psychologyRehabilitationActivities of daily livingPsychosocialMobile phoneQuality of life (healthcare)PsychologyComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mobile and wearable devices are increasingly being used to support our everyday lives and track our behavior. Since daily support and behavior tracking are two core components of cognitive rehabilitation, such personal devices could be employed in rehabilitation approaches aimed at improving independence and engagement among people with dementia. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this work was to investigate the feasibility of using smartphones and smartwatches to augment rehabilitation by providing adaptable, personalized support and objective, continuous measures of mobility and activity behavior. METHODS: A feasibility study comprising 6 in-depth case studies was carried out among people with early-stage dementia and their caregivers. Participants used a smartphone and smartwatch for 8 weeks for personalized support and followed goals for quality of life. Data were collected from device sensors and logs, mobile self-reports, assessments, weekly phone calls, and interviews. This data were analyzed to evaluate the utility of sensor data generated by devices used by people with dementia in an everyday life context; this was done to compare objective measures with subjective reports of mobility and activity and to examine technology acceptance focusing on usefulness and health efficacy. RESULTS: Adequate sensor data was generated to reveal behavioral patterns, even for minimal device use. Objective mobility and activity measures reflecting fluctuations in participants' self-reported behavior, especially when combined, may be advantageous in revealing gradual trends and could provide detailed insights regarding goal attainment ratings. Personalized support benefited all participants to varying degrees by addressing functional, memory, safety, and psychosocial needs. A total of 4 of 6 (67%) participants felt motivated to be active by tracking their step count. One participant described a highly positive impact on mobility, anxiety, mood, and caregiver burden, mainly as a result of navigation support and location-tracking tools. CONCLUSIONS: Smartphones and wearables could provide beneficial and pervasive support and monitoring for rehabilitation among people with dementia. These results substantiate the need for further investigation on a larger scale, especially considering the inevitable presence of mobile and wearable technology in our everyday lives for years to come.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.390 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations49
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207