Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41100691›Full record

ArticleJMIR aging2025

An Accessible Multifunctional System to Support Safe and Independent Aging in Place: Iterative Development and Qualitative Analysis.

Céline Madeleine Aldenhoven, Matthew Milton, Lisa D'Ambrosio, Chaiwoo Lee, Sophia Ashebir, Elisabeth André

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR aging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

Céline Madeleine AldenhovenSoftware Engineering (Elite Graduate Program), Technical University of Munich, Ludwig Maximilian University, University of Augsburg, Munich and Augsburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0005-8655-493X
Matthew MiltonAgeLab, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Ave, E40-275, Cambridge, MA, 02139, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0005-9537-9379
Lisa D'AmbrosioAgeLab, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Ave, E40-275, Cambridge, MA, 02139, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6336-0722
Chaiwoo LeeAgeLab, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Ave, E40-275, Cambridge, MA, 02139, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8835-4190
Sophia AshebirAgeLab, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Ave, E40-275, Cambridge, MA, 02139, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8477-9573
Elisabeth AndréChair for Human Centered Artificial Intelligence, Faculty of Applied Computer Science, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2367-162X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The global population of older adults is rapidly increasing, while the number of relative caregivers is declining. This creates a critical need for solutions that support caregiving and enable older adults to age in place while maintaining their independence. Many existing caregiving technologies focus on easing caregivers' burdens through surveillance-based systems, which often prioritize caregivers' needs over those of older adults. Such designs can unintentionally disempower older adults by devaluing their autonomy and decision-making capabilities. Objective: This study explored older adults' and designers' reactions to a technology-enabled system called LifeTomorrow that was built by centering older adults as the primary users. The system aims to support their autonomy to make informed choices and their desire for independent living, while balancing their social and functional needs with those of informal caregivers. Methods: A total of 37 participants, including older adults, caregivers, and designers, engaged in 2 iterative rounds of user studies to explore daily caregiving needs and technology usage. The system's design and features were refined based on these insights. A qualitative thematic analysis was conducted using the framework of the self-determination theory to evaluate how the system fulfills the basic psychological needs of competence, autonomy, and relatedness. Results: The analysis underscored the system's value to older adults and their caregivers, and its fulfillment of basic human psychological needs (competence, autonomy, and relatedness), consistent with the goals of supporting a high quality of life for older users and caregivers. We found that relatedness is fostered through features enabling remote connection and communication, such as chat functions and shared health data. Autonomy is supported by empowering older adults to manage their health information, make informed choices about data sharing, and benefit from safety features like fall detection and emergency calls. Competence is enhanced through accessible design elements, including intuitive navigation, high-contrast visuals, and multigenerational usability. These features allow older adults and caregivers to confidently engage with the system and are targeted at improving their overall quality of life. Conclusions: Through evaluation of the LifeTomorrow system, this study suggests possibilities for using a holistic, inclusive solution to support safe and independent aging in place and prioritizing the autonomy and empowerment of older adults while addressing caregivers' needs for support and connection. By centering older adults as active participants rather than passive recipients of care, the system exemplifies a shift toward equitable, user-centered technology in caregiving. Future research should investigate the long-term impacts of such systems on aging-in-place outcomes.

Indexed as

AgingCaregiversIndependent LivingAgedAged, 80 and overAging in PlaceFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPersonal AutonomyQualitative Researchaging in placegerontologyinformal caregiversiterative designmobile appsolder adultsqualitative text analysisself-determination theory

Identifiers

PMID41100691
PMCPMC12530453

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.