MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413787534 · doi:10.2196/75189

Evaluating the Feasibility of a Dyadic, Touch-Based Multimedia Tablet Intervention and Its Effects on the Caregiver-Patient Relationship Among Individuals With Mild Cognitive Impairment: Qualitative Triangulation Study

2025· article· en· W4413787534 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Alexa von Bosse, Anna Thum, Sonja Mahler, Henriette Schulz, Paulina Weuthen, Christophe Kunze

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Aging · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)PsychologyMultimediaTriangulationCognitionCognitive impairmentComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Approximately 20% of the global population is affected by mild cognitive impairment (MCI), with around 15% progressing to dementia within 2 years. Touch-based multimedia applications can support cognitive, social, and physical functioning, potentially enhancing daily life and strengthening caregiver-patient relationships through shared engagement. Although interest in dyadic, technology-assisted interventions is increasing, empirical evidence on their feasibility and acceptability in home-based settings remains scarce. In particular, little is known about their impact on caregiver-care recipient dynamics and the factors that facilitate or hinder their use. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of a dyadic, tablet-based multimedia intervention for individuals with MCI and their caregivers in a home setting, focusing on user experiences, use barriers and facilitators, and the intervention's impact on the caregiver-patient relationship. METHODS: We applied qualitative triangulation, combining naturalistic observations and semistructured interviews. Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. The intervention was codeveloped by a multidisciplinary team and implemented as a user-centered, tablet-based modular platform with customizable cognitive, physical, and interactive exercises. RESULTS: We recruited a total of 40 participants, comprising 20 (50%) individuals with MCI and their 20 (50%) caregivers. Our study confirmed the feasibility of a touch-based multimedia intervention for both groups. Despite initial challenges with navigation and touch interfaces, most participants demonstrated increased confidence and competence, particularly with tailored caregiver support. Instances of enhanced communication and emotional connection were described by care partners and then became visible during their interaction with the intervention. Shared moments of laughter, mutual encouragement, and coordinated task execution indicated that the intervention could create opportunities for relational closeness. Biography-related tasks proved particularly effective, stimulating meaningful conversation and storytelling that facilitated the sharing of personal memories and experiences. While some dyads experienced occasional tensions due to impatience, differing expectations, or dominant behavior by one partner, the overall atmosphere was one of cooperation, support, and adaptability. The intervention demonstrated how technology can serve as a tool to facilitate shared experiences, promote cognitive engagement, and enrich interpersonal relationships in everyday caregiving contexts. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that the home-based implementation of a dyadic, touch-based multimedia intervention can be feasible for individuals with MCI and their caregivers. A key finding is that biographically oriented content fosters caregiver-patient relationships by acting as a catalyst for personal dialogues and collective reminiscence. These interactions enhance emotional intimacy and mutual understanding, highlighting the potential of technology-driven interventions in dementia care. The intervention incorporated multiple domains, including cognitive stimulation, physical activation, and communicative-social interaction, all of which proved highly promising. In addition, the regular implementation of the intervention in home settings appears to be a realistic and achievable approach.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.414

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.370 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR AgingSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207