MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308877343 · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2022.1038008

Real-time location systems technology in the care of older adults with cognitive impairment living in residential care: A scoping review

2022· review· en· W4308877343 on OpenAlexafffund
Lynn Haslam‐Larmer, Leia C Shum, Charlene H. Chu, Caitlin McArthur, Alastair J. Flint, Shehroz S. Khan, Andrea Iaboni

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychiatry · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicContext-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of TorontoToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity Health Network
FundersToronto Rehabilitation InstituteAGE-WELL
KeywordsCognitive impairmentGerontologyResidential careCognitionMedicineDementiaIndependent livingPsychologyPsychiatryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: There has been growing interest in using real-time location systems (RTLS) in residential care settings. This technology has clinical applications for locating residents within a care unit and as a nurse call system, and can also be used to gather information about movement, location, and activity over time. RTLS thus provides health data to track markers of health and wellbeing and augment healthcare decisions. To date, no reviews have examined the potential use of RTLS data in caring for older adults with cognitive impairment living in a residential care setting. Objective: This scoping review aims to explore the use of data from real-time locating systems (RTLS) technology to inform clinical measures and augment healthcare decision-making in the care of older adults with cognitive impairment who live in residential care settings. Methods: Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), APA PsycINFO (Ovid) and IEEE Xplore databases were searched for published English-language articles that reported the results of studies that investigated RTLS technologies in persons aged 50 years or older with cognitive impairment who were living in a residential care setting. Included studies were summarized, compared and synthesized according to the study outcomes. Results: A total of 27 studies were included. RTLS data were used to assess activity levels, characterization of wandering, cognition, social interaction, and to monitor a resident's health and wellbeing. These RTLS-based measures were not consistently validated against clinical measurements or clinically important outcomes, and no studies have examined their effectiveness or impact on decision-making. Conclusion: This scoping review describes how data from RTLS technology has been used to support clinical care of older adults with dementia. Research efforts have progressed from using the data to track activity levels to, most recently, using the data to inform clinical decision-making and as a predictor of delirium. Future studies are needed to validate RTLS-based health indices and examine how these indices can be used to inform decision-making.

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 score0.645
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations16
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PsychiatrySame topicContext-Aware Activity Recognition SystemsFrench-language works237,207