ArticleJMIR aging2026
Personalized Digital Care Program Allocation for Older Adults: Reinforcement Learning-Based Simulation Study.
Article in JMIR aging, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAs the demand for innovative older adult care grows alongside a shortage of care workers, personalization is key to optimizing services and enhancing long-term sustainability. This study proposes an adaptive reinforcement learning (RL)-based framework to promote precision digital care by dynamically assigning care programs based on individuals' unique characteristics and evolving needs. Its effectiveness was evaluated through simulation-based experiments comparing multiple allocation methods within an artificial intelligence (AI)-powered care call service for older adults.
objectiveThis study aimed to develop and evaluate an RL-based model for personalizing digital care program allocation to optimize care engagement and health outcomes among low-income older adults living alone.
methodsWe developed the framework by using contextual bandits, specifically Thompson Sampling, to maximize user outcomes. Four program allocation strategies were tested using a synthetic dataset of user features and program attributes. Simulations were conducted over multiple iterations to evaluate how the model adapts over time and optimizes program assignments compared with static methods.
resultsFour program allocation methods were compared across 100 simulation runs (n=3000 assignments per run) using 2 datasets (AI Call: n=1196; Community Health Survey [CHS]: n=72,812): (1) systematic allocation (baseline), (2) single best program based on population average, (3) idealized personalized delivery (theoretical upper bound), and (4) precision digital care using Thompson Sampling. Precision digital care outperformed baseline and population-average approaches, achieving outcomes comparable to the theoretical upper bound. Compared to systematic allocation, call success rates increased by 84.2% (AI Call) and 54.4% (CHS), Patient Health Questionnaire-2 depression scores decreased by 32.1% (AI Call) and 41.4% (CHS), and self-reported health scores improved by 19% (AI Call) and 22% (CHS). It also showed improved learning efficiency, refining assignments dynamically as it learned from user responses.
conclusionsOur findings emphasize the importance of personalization in digital care. We plan to refine and validate the model through a publicly funded AI care program for community-dwelling, low-income older adults living alone in the Republic of Korea. RL offers a scalable and effective approach to advance precision digital care delivery and support future innovations in aging services.
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.