MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2975524494 · doi:10.2196/15122

Examining Mobile Technologies to Support Older Adults With Dementia Through the Lens of Personhood and Human Needs: Scoping Review

2019· article· en· W2975524494 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bon Mi Koo, Lisa M. Vizer

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Research Foundation of KoreaMinistry of EducationNational Research Foundation
KeywordsCINAHLPsycINFOPersonhoodDementiaThematic analysisPopulationMEDLINESocial supportGerontologyPsychologyMedicineNursingQualitative researchSociologyPsychological interventionSocial psychologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: With the world's rapidly growing older adult population, there is an increase in the number of people living with dementia. This growth leads to a strain on their caregivers and our health care system and to an increased attention on mitigating strain by using mobile technology to sustain the independence of people with dementia. However, less attention is given to whether these technologies meet the stated and unstated needs of people with dementia. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to provide an overview of the current research on mobile technologies for people with dementia, considering the current research through the lens of personhood and human needs, and to identify any gaps that represent research opportunities. METHODS: We performed a systematic search in Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Web of Science, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in October 2018. We screened 5560 articles and identified 24 that met our inclusion and exclusion criteria. We then performed thematic analysis to organize the articles by the types of support mobile technologies provide and mapped those types of support to human needs to identify the gaps in support. RESULTS: Articles described research on mobile technologies that support people with dementia to (1) perform daily activities, (2) maintain social interaction, (3) aid memory, (4) engage in leisure activities, (5) track location, and (6) monitor health. At least one type of support mapped to each human need, with most supporting lower-level needs such as physiological and safety needs. Little attention seems to be paid to personhood. CONCLUSIONS: Mobile technologies that support daily activities, relationships, memory, leisure activities, health, and safety can partially compensate for decreased function owing to dementia, but the human needs of people with dementia are often not adequately considered. Most technologies support basic physiological and safety needs, whereas many pay little attention to higher-level needs such as self-esteem and agency. Important research opportunities include using person-centered methods to develop technology to meet higher-level needs and to preserve personhood by incorporating human and psychological needs of people with dementia along with ethical considerations.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0190.015
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations75
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207