Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28830444›Full record

ArticleBMC geriatrics2017

Origins and consequences of technology acquirement by independent-living seniors: towards an integrative model.

S T M Peek, K G Luijkx, H J M Vrijhoef, M E Nieboer, S Aarts, C S van der Voort, M D Rijnaard, E J M Wouters

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC geriatrics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Friends or Frenemies? The Role of Social Technology in the Lives of Older People.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

S T M PeekSchool of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Department of Tranzo, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands. research@sebastiaanpeek.nl.
K G LuijkxSchool of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Department of Tranzo, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
H J M VrijhoefSchool of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Department of Tranzo, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
M E NieboerInstitute of Allied Health Professions, Chair of Health Innovations and Technology, Fontys University of Applied Sciences, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
S AartsInstitute of Allied Health Professions, Chair of Health Innovations and Technology, Fontys University of Applied Sciences, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
C S van der VoortInstitute of Allied Health Professions, Chair of Health Innovations and Technology, Fontys University of Applied Sciences, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
M D RijnaardInstitute of Allied Health Professions, Chair of Health Innovations and Technology, Fontys University of Applied Sciences, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
E J M WoutersInstitute of Allied Health Professions, Chair of Health Innovations and Technology, Fontys University of Applied Sciences, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLiving independently can be challenging for seniors. Technologies are expected to help older adults age in place, yet little empirical research is available on how seniors develop a need for technologies, how they acquire these technologies, and how these subsequently affect their lives. Aging is complex, dynamic and personal. But how does this translate to seniors' adoption and acceptance of technology? To better understand origins and consequences of technology acquirement by independent-living seniors, an explorative longitudinal qualitative field study was set up.

methodsHome visits were made to 33 community-dwelling seniors living in the Netherlands, on three occasions (2012-2014). Semi-structured interviews were conducted on the timeline of acquirements, and people and factors involved in acquirements. Additionally, participants were interviewed on experiences in using technologies since acquirement. Thematic analysis was employed to analyze interview transcripts, using a realist approach to better understand the contexts, mechanisms and outcomes of technology acquirements.

resultsFindings were accumulated in a new conceptual model: The Cycle of Technology Acquirement by Independent-Living Seniors (C-TAILS), which provides an integrative perspective on why and how technologies are acquired, and why these may or may not prove to be appropriate and effective, considering an independent-living senior's needs and circumstances at a given point in time. We found that externally driven and purely desire-driven acquirements led to a higher risk of suboptimal use and low levels of need satisfaction.

conclusionsTechnology acquirement by independent-living seniors may be best characterized as a heterogeneous process with many different origins, pathways and consequences. Furthermore, technologies that are acquired in ways that are not congruent with seniors' personal needs and circumstances run a higher risk of proving to be ineffective or inappropriate. Yet, these needs and circumstances are subject to change, and the C-TAILS model can be employed to better understand contexts and mechanisms that come into play.

Indexed as

AgingIndependent LivingSelf-Help DevicesActivities of Daily LivingAgedAged, 80 and overBiomedical TechnologyFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleNeeds AssessmentNetherlandsOld Age AssistancePatient ParticipationQualitative ResearchAging in placeAssistive technologyIndependent livingLongitudinal researchModelOlder adultsQualitative researchSeniorsTechnology acceptanceTechnology adoption

Identifiers

PMID28830444
PMCPMC5567629

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.