SynthesisFrontiers in public health2025
Effect of Active and Assisted Living technologies on psychosocial well-being in older adults: systematic review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In a rapidly aging society, the concept of psychosocial well-being becomes increasingly relevant, independent of health. Indeed, psychosocial well-being is closely related to autonomy, independence, and self-efficacy. Technological approaches that support older adults in leading active, healthy, and independent lives are framed within the concept of Active and Assisted Living (AAL). However, evidence regarding their impact on psychosocial well-being remains limited. Objective: This systematic review evaluates the psychosocial effects of AAL technologies in older adults. Methods: We included intervention studies reporting psychosocial outcomes related to older adults' use of AAL technologies. We excluded studies involving participants receiving continuous on-site healthcare assistance or with moderate to severe mental health problems, technologies restricted to basic home automation or lacking advanced data processing and automation, and interventions focused on rehabilitation after acute events. Studies using not-validated measures or without quantitative evaluation of outcomes were also excluded. Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, HealthSTAR, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, IEEE Xplore, APA PsycArticles, Scopus, and Web of Science from inception to January 2025. Key attributes of eligible publications were critically discussed using a 2 × 2 logic which frames findings by both technological performance and psychosocial outcome. Results: Of 6,349 records identified, 15 independent studies were included. AAL solutions targeted promotion or guidance of physical activity, self-management of chronic conditions, fostering healthy and safe habits or distraction from pain. Twelve studies assessed health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and close concepts. Depression was the second most investigated outcome, followed by fear of falling, with QoL and loneliness also reported. Conclusion: This review offers a critical analysis of both the findings and the methodologies employed in the selected studies, acknowledging the complexity of drawing unequivocally positive or negative conclusions regarding the impact of AAL technologies on the psychosocial well-being of older adults. The results highlight the need for a shared conceptual framework to inform the design, assessment, and validation of technologies intended to support daily living.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.