Factors affecting information technology use from the perspective of aging persons with cognitive disabilities: A scoping review of qualitative research
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although aging persons with cognitive disabilities may benefit from information technologies (IT), researchers have identified barriers affecting their IT use. However, most studies do not emphasize the needs and experiences reported by these users themselves. OBJECTIVE: To identify factors affecting IT use from the perspective of aging persons with cognitive disabilities. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of peer-reviewed studies published between January 2008 and December 2018 that investigated IT use by aging persons with cognitive disabilities as reported by these individuals. Factors affecting participants’ IT use were synthesized through a thematic analysis of relevant studies’ findings. RESULTS: Seven studies were included in our analysis. We found technology-related (accessibility, usefulness, cost), social (support, stigma and other social pressure), and personal (experience with IT, attitudes toward IT use, functional limitations, life situation) factors related to participants’ IT use. Stigma was identified as a key barrier to IT use that has been underestimated in previous quantitative research. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the role that stigma plays in the use and adoption of technology among aging persons with cognitive disabilities is critical to developing successful strategies to promote this population’s IT use.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.056 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it