ArticleJMIR aging2026
Exploring Information Access in Aging Populations and Those With Dementia and Mild Cognitive Impairment in the United Kingdom: Survey and Focus Group 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: With the growing aging population, technology that supports independent living is increasingly important. Web search systems are well established, whereas generative artificial intelligence (Gen-AI; eg, ChatGPT) represents a newer, adaptive tool that could offer personalized information access. However, little is known about how older adults, particularly those with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or mild dementia, perceive and engage with these systems. Objective: This study explored the use of and perspectives on web search and Gen-AI in older adults with and without cognitive impairment (including MCI and early-stage dementia). Methods: A UK-wide mixed methods study was conducted with older adults, including those with MCI or mild dementia. An online survey captured technology use, Likert-scale ratings of web search and Gen-AI, and reasons for nonuse. Follow-up focus groups provided in-depth qualitative perspectives. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive and comparative statistics, while qualitative data were thematically analyzed. Results: Survey findings showed higher use of web search (275/280, 98.2%) compared to Gen-AI (40/286, 14%) within these groups. Web search was rated positively across participants, although challenges were raised regarding the phrasing of queries and commercialization. Gen-AI use was less common, but more than half of nonusers expressed willingness to adopt it in the future. Combined with focus group responses, themes exploring keyword searching, mistrust, lack of knowledge, and willingness to learn were established. Participants also suggested potential applications of Gen-AI, such as supporting independent living through monitoring and simplifying complex searches. Conclusions: Web search remains the primary method, and participants highlighted both advantages and frustrations with current systems. Gen-AI was underused but seen as promising, with its adoption mainly limited by mistrust and knowledge gaps. Our findings indicate that structured training, early introduction, and user-centered design could encourage adoption, enhance accessibility, and support independent living among older adults with and without MCI.
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.