Factors Associated With Intention to Adopt mHealth Apps Among Dementia Caregivers With a Chronic Condition: Cross-sectional, Correlational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the United States, nearly 80% of family caregivers of people with dementia have at least one chronic condition. Dementia caregivers experience high stress and burden that adversely affect their health and self-management. mHealth apps can improve health and self-management among dementia caregivers with a chronic condition. However, mHealth app adoption by dementia caregivers is low, and reasons for this are not well understood. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to explore factors associated with dementia caregivers' intention to adopt mHealth apps for chronic disease self-management. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, correlational study and recruited a convenience sample of dementia caregivers. We created a survey using validated instruments and collected data through computer-assisted telephone interviews and web-based surveys. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, we recruited dementia caregivers through community-based strategies, such as attending community events. After nationwide closures due to the pandemic, the team focused on web-based recruitment. Multiple logistic regression analyses were used to test the relationships between the independent and dependent variables. RESULTS: Our sample of 117 caregivers had an average age of 53 (SD 17.4) years, 16 (SD 3.3) years of education, and 4 (SD 2.5) chronic conditions. The caregivers were predominantly women (92/117, 78.6%) and minorities (63/117, 53.8%), experienced some to extreme income difficulties (64/117, 54.7%), and were the child or child-in-law (53/117, 45.3%) of the person with dementia. In logistic regression models adjusting for the control variables, caregiver burden (odds ratio [OR] 1.3, 95% CI 0.57-2.8; P=.57), time spent caregiving per week (OR 1.7, 95% CI 0.77-3.9; P=.18), and burden of chronic disease and treatment (OR 2.3, 95% CI 0.91-5.7; P=.08) were not significantly associated with the intention to adopt mHealth apps. In the final multiple logistic regression model, only perceived usefulness (OR 23, 95% CI 5.6-97; P<.001) and the interaction term for caregivers' education and burden of chronic disease and treatment (OR 31, 95% CI 2.2-430; P=.01) were significantly associated with their intention to adopt mHealth apps. Perceived ease of use (OR 2.4, 95% CI 0.67-8.7; P=.18) and social influence (OR 1.8, 95% CI 0.58-5.7; P=.31) were not significantly associated with the intention to adopt mHealth apps. CONCLUSIONS: When designing mHealth app interventions for dementia caregivers with a chronic condition, it is important to consider caregivers' perceptions about how well mHealth apps can help their self-management and which app features would be most useful for self-management. Caregiving factors may not be relevant to caregivers' intention to adopt mHealth apps. This is promising because mHealth strategies may overcome barriers to caregivers' self-management. Future research should investigate reasons why caregivers with a low education level and low burden of chronic disease and treatment have significantly lower intention to adopt mHealth apps for self-management.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".