Utilizing Smart Televisions as Assistive Technology to Enhance Communication and Social Lives of Older Adults: Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Over the past decade, the proportion of the world's population aged ≥65 years has grown exponentially, presenting significant challenges, such as social isolation and loneliness among this population. Assistive technologies have shown potential in enhancing the quality of life for older adults by improving their physical, cognitive, and communication abilities. Research has shown that smart televisions are user-friendly and commonly used among older adults. However, smart televisions have been underutilized as assistive technologies. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the state of the art in using smart televisions as assistive technologies to enhance communication and social interactions among older adults. METHODS: The search was conducted following the guidelines for performing a systematic literature review, which included 6 databases, that are, the IEEE, ACM, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, Engineering Village, and Springer. A range of keywords were used in different combinations, including "smart TV," "older adults," "elderly," "communication," "messaging," "video call," and "application." A set of inclusion and exclusion criteria was defined before the search, and the screening was performed by 3 researchers. We analyzed the selected articles in accordance with the review's aim and the established inclusion and exclusion criteria. None of the articles were subjected to quantitative synthesis because of the significant variations in the data measured. RESULTS: After screening 2671 records from the abstract level to full text, 30 articles were identified as relevant studies, demonstrating both direct and indirect impacts on the social lives of older adults through the use of smart televisions as assistive technology. Some articles were part of the same or larger studies, which makes the number of actual projects even smaller. This indicates that smart televisions have been underutilized as assistive technologies for enhancing older adults' communication and social lives. More than half of the articles proposed their own prototype, and these prototypes were primarily targeted for use at home, while some were targeted for use at geriatric care units or nursing homes. User involvement among older adults was high among the included articles, and some also included other users, such as health care personnel, administrative staff, and engineers. The included studies were mostly from Europe. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights the potential of smart televisions as assistive technologies to enhance social connectivity among older adults, and identifies several research gaps. Most studies focus on short-term usability and are geographically limited to Europe. Future research should include longitudinal studies, explore diverse cultural attitudes, and focus on adaptive solutions for various health conditions. We hope this review will inspire research on smart televisions as assistive technologies, enhancing social interactions and quality of life for older adults.
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 | 0.006 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".