Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37833689›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2023

Use and benefit of information, communication, and assistive technology among community-dwelling older adults - a cross-sectional study.

Marina L Fotteler, Thomas D Kocar, Dhayana Dallmeier, Brigitte Kohn, Sarah Mayer, Ann-Kathrin Waibel, Walter Swoboda, Michael Denkinger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Marina L FottelerDigiHealth Institute, Neu-Ulm University of Applied Sciences, Wileystrasse 1, 89231, Neu-Ulm, Germany. marina.fotteler@hnu.de.
Thomas D KocarInstitute for Geriatric Research, Ulm University Medical Center, Ulm, Germany.
Dhayana DallmeierAgaplesion Bethesda Clinic Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Brigitte KohnAgaplesion Bethesda Clinic Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Sarah MayerAgaplesion Bethesda Clinic Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Ann-Kathrin WaibelDigiHealth Institute, Neu-Ulm University of Applied Sciences, Wileystrasse 1, 89231, Neu-Ulm, Germany.
Walter SwobodaDigiHealth Institute, Neu-Ulm University of Applied Sciences, Wileystrasse 1, 89231, Neu-Ulm, Germany.
Michael DenkingerInstitute for Geriatric Research, Ulm University Medical Center, Ulm, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTechnology can support healthy aging and empower older adults to live independently. However, technology adoption by older adults, particularly assistive technology (AT), is limited and little is known about the types of AT used among older adults. This study explored the use of key information and communication technologies (ICT) and AT among community-dwelling adults aged ≥ 65.

methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted among community-dwelling adults aged ≥ 65 in southern Germany using a paper-based questionnaire. The questionnaire included questions on the three domains sociodemographic aspects, health status, and technology use. Technology use was considered separately for key ICT (smartphone, computer/laptop, and tablet) and a range of 31 different AT. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, univariate analyses, and Bernoulli Naïve Bayes modelling.

resultsThe questionnaire was answered by 616 participants (response rate: 24.64%). ICT were used by 497 (80.68%) participants and were associated with lower age, higher level of education, living together with someone, availability of internet connection, higher interest in technology, and better health status (p < .05). No association was found with sex and size of the hometown. The most frequently owned AT were a landline phone, a body scale, and a blood pressure monitor. Several AT related to functionality, (instrumental) activities of daily living- (IADL), and morbidity were used more frequently among non-ICT users compared to ICT-users: senior mobile phone (19.33% vs. 3.22%), in-house emergency call (13.45% vs. 1.01%), hearing aid (26.89% vs. 16.7%), personal lift (7.56% vs. 1.61%), electronic stand-up aid (4.2% vs. 0%). Those with higher interest in technology reported higher levels of benefit from technology use.

conclusionsDespite the benefits older adults can gain from technology, its use remains low, especially among those with multimorbidity. Particularly newer, more innovative and (I)ADL-related AT appear underutilized. Considering the potential challenges in providing adequate care in the future, it may be crucial to support the use of these specific AT among older and frailer populations. To focus scientific and societal work, AT with a high impact on autonomy ((I)ADL/disease-related) should be distinguished from devices with a low impact on autonomy (household-/ comfort-related).

Indexed as

Independent LivingSelf-Help DevicesActivities of Daily LivingAgedBayes TheoremCommunicationCross-Sectional StudiesHumansAssistive technologyBenefitCross-sectionalInformation and communication technologyOlder adultsSociodemographic

Identifiers

PMID37833689
PMCPMC10576310

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.