Technology Usability for People Living With Dementia: Concept Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Usability is a key indicator of the quality of technology products. In tandem with technological advancements, potential use by individuals with dementia is increasing. However, defining the usability of technology for individuals with dementia remains an ongoing challenge. The diverse and progressive nature of dementia adds complexity to the creation of universal usability criteria, highlighting the need for focused deliberations. Technological interventions offer potential benefits for people living with dementia and caregivers. Amid COVID-19, technology's role in health care access is growing, especially among older adults. Enabling the diverse population of people living with dementia to enjoy the benefits of technologies requires particular attention to their needs, desires, capabilities, and vulnerabilities to potential harm from technologies. Successful technological interventions for dementia require meticulous consideration of technology usability. OBJECTIVE: This concept analysis aims to examine the usability of technology in the context of individuals living with dementia to establish a clear definition for usability within this specific demographic. METHODS: The framework by Walker and Avant was used to guide this concept analysis. We conducted a literature review spanning 1984 to 2024, exploring technology usability for people with dementia through the PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases using the keywords "technology usability" and "dementia." We also incorporated clinical definitions and integrated interview data from 29 dyads comprising individuals with mild Alzheimer dementia and their respective care partners, resulting in a total of 58 older adults. This approach aimed to offer a more comprehensive portrayal of the usability needs of individuals living with dementia, emphasizing practical application. RESULTS: The evidence from the literature review unveiled that usability encompasses attributes such as acceptable learnability, efficiency, and satisfaction. The clinical perspective on dementia stages, subtypes, and symptoms underscores the importance of tailored technology usability assessment. Feedback from 29 dyads also emphasized the value of simplicity, clear navigation, age-sensitive design, personalized features, and audio support. Thus, design should prioritize personalized assistance for individuals living with dementia, moving away from standardized technological approaches. Synthesized from various sources, the defined usability attributes for individuals living with dementia not only encompass the general usability properties of effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction but also include other key factors: adaptability, personalization, intuitiveness, and simplicity, to ensure that technology is supportive and yields tangible benefits for this demographic. CONCLUSIONS: Usability is crucial for people living with dementia when designing technological interventions. It necessitates an understanding of user characteristics, dementia stages, symptoms, needs, and tasks, as well as consideration of varied physical requirements, potential sensory loss, and age-related changes. Disease progression requires adapting to evolving symptoms. Recommendations include versatile, multifunctional technology designs; accommodating diverse needs; and adjusting software functionalities for personalization. Product feature classification can be flexible based on user conditions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".