MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3131827052 · doi:10.2196/21808

Mobile Apps to Support Family Caregivers of People With Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementias in Managing Disruptive Behaviors: Qualitative Study With Users Embedded in a Scoping Review

2021· review· en· W3131827052 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Marjorie Désormeaux-Moreau, Charlie-Maude Michel, Mélanie Vallières, Maryse Racine, Myriame Poulin-Paquet, Delphine Lacasse, Pascale Gionet, Mélissa Généreux, Wael Lachiheb, Véronique Provencher

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Aging · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsHealth and Social Services Centre University Institute of Geriatrics of SherbrookeCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFamily caregiversCLARITYIntervention (counseling)PsychologyMobile appsFocus groupAggressionInternet privacyApplied psychologyMedicineNursingWorld Wide WebPsychiatryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: People with Alzheimer disease and related dementias often display disruptive behaviors (eg, aggression, wandering, and restlessness), which increase family caregivers' burden of care. However, there are few tools currently available to help these caregivers manage disruptive behaviors. Mobile apps could meet this need, but to date little is known about them. OBJECTIVE: The aims of our study were to identify existing mobile apps designed to support family caregivers of people with Alzheimer disease and related dementias in managing disruptive behaviors; explore whether family caregivers view these mobile apps as relevant to meeting their needs and as useful in managing disruptive behaviors; and document the types of mobile apps that are of interest and appeal to most family caregivers (with regard to format, ergonomics, and clarity). METHODS: A review of mobile apps initially conducted in February 2018 was updated in March 2019 with 2 platforms (App Store [Apple Inc.] and Google Play [Google]). The selected apps were first analyzed independently by 3 raters (2 students and 1 researcher) for each of the platforms. A focus group discussion was then held with 4 family caregivers to explore their perceptions of the apps according to their needs and interests. The content of the discussion was analyzed. RESULTS: Initially, 7 of 118 apps identified met the inclusion criteria. An eighth app, recommended by one of the knowledge users, was added later. Four family caregivers (women aged between 58 and 78 years) participated in the discussion. Participants expressed a preference for easy-to-understand apps that provide concrete intervention strategies. They reported being most inclined to use two apps, Dementia Advisor and DTA Behaviours. CONCLUSIONS: Few mobile apps on the market meet the needs of family caregivers in terms of content and usability. Our results could help to address this gap by identifying what family caregivers deem relevant in a mobile app to help them manage disruptive behaviors.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.502
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.400 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations21
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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