An Individual Cognitive Stimulation Therapy App for People With Dementia: Development and Usability Study of Thinkability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a lack of technological resources for the mental stimulation and communication of people with dementia, which can be helpful in improving cognition and quality of life. Paper-based individual cognitive stimulation therapy (iCST) for people with dementia has the potential to be adapted to a touchscreen format. This can improve accessibility and provide mental stimulation using interactive features. There is a need for a rigorous and systematic approach toward development, leading to improved suitability and implementation of the intervention, so that more people can benefit from its use. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to develop and investigate the usability of Thinkability, an iCST app that can be used by people with dementia and carers on touchscreen tablets. METHODS: The Medical Research Council framework for evaluating complex interventions and the Centre for eHealth Research roadmap served as frameworks for the stages of intervention and technology development. The development of the iCST app itself adopted an agile approach with elements from action research. Hence, it was developed in 3 successive sprints and was evaluated by relevant stakeholders at each sprint. Sprint 1 included 2 patient and public involvement (PPI) consultation meetings, sprint 2 included 1 PPI consultation meeting, and 4 focus groups and 10 individual interviews were organized in sprint 3. A feasibility trial is currently underway. RESULTS: The findings from each sprint were used to inform the development. Sprint 1 helped to identify the relevant evidence base and explored the attitudes of people with dementia and carers toward a potential iCST app. In sprint 2, an initial prototype was evaluated in a small PPI consultation meeting. In sprint 3, feedback was gathered through a qualitative study on the quality and perceived effectiveness of the iCST app. It was well received by people with dementia and carers. A need for more updated and personalized content was highlighted. CONCLUSIONS: This study proves that an agile approach toward technology development involving all relevant stakeholders is effective in creating suitable technology. Adding to our previous knowledge of noncomputerized cognitive stimulation therapy, the release of the iCST app will make this psychosocial intervention accessible to more users worldwide.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".