MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399960509 · doi:10.3390/geriatrics9040085

Existing Digital Health Technology Index Summary Report for Older Adults Living with Neurocognitive Disorders (Mild and Major) and Their Informal Caregivers: An Environmental Scan

2024· review· en· W4399960509 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ambily Jose, Maxime Sasseville, Ellen Gorus, Anik Giguère, Anne Bourbonnais, Samira Abbasgholizadeh Rahimi, Clémence Balley, Ronald Buyl, Marie‐Pierre Gagnon

Bibliographic record

VenueGeriatrics · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology Use by Older Adults
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence InstituteUniversité de MontréalUniversité Laval
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesFonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
KeywordsNeurocognitiveDigital healthMedicinePopulationClinical decision support systemHealth careCognitionGerontologyApplied psychologyMedical educationNursingDecision support systemEnvironmental healthPsychologyPsychiatryArtificial intelligenceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Digital health has added numerous promising solutions to enhance the health and wellness of people with neurocognitive disorders (NCDs) and their informal caregivers. (1) Background: It is important to obtain a comprehensive view of currently available technologies, their outcomes, and conditions of success to inform recommendations regarding digital health solutions for people with NCDs and their caregivers. This environmental scan was performed to identify the features of existing digital health solutions relevant to the targeted population. This work reviews currently available digital health solutions and their related characteristics to develop a decision support tool for older adults living with mild or major neurocognitive disorders and their informal caregivers. This knowledge will aid the development of a decision support tool to assist older adults and their informal caregivers in their search for adequate digital health solutions according to their needs and preferences based on trustable information. (2) Methods: We conducted an environmental scan to identify digital health solutions from a systematic review and targeted searches in the grey literature covering the regions of Canada and Europe. Technological tools were scanned based on a preformatted extraction grid. We assessed their relevance based on selected attributes and summarized the findings. (3) Results: We identified 100 available digital health solutions. The majority (56%) were not specific to NCDs. Only 28% provided scientific evidence of their effectiveness. Remote patient care, movement tracking, and cognitive exercises were the most common purposes of digital health solutions. Most solutions were presented as decision aid tools, pill dispensers, apps, web, or a combination of these platforms. (4) Conclusions: This environmental scan allowed for identifying current digital health solutions for older adults with mild or major neurocognitive disorders and their informal caregivers. Findings from the environmental scan highlight the need for additional approaches to strengthen digital health interventions for the well-being of older adults with mild and major NCDs and their informal and formal healthcare providers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.075
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.075
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0410.044
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeriatricsSame topicTechnology Use by Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207