Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31124467›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2019

A Novel Instrument for Measuring Older People's Attitudes Toward Technology (TechPH): Development and Validation.

Peter Anderberg, Shahryar Eivazzadeh, Johan Sanmartin Berglund

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04385797 (Cognitive Outcomes During COVID-19 confiNemeNt in Elderly and Their Caregivers Using Technologies for DEMentia), which is not on this map. Cited by 40 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
24.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

NCT04385797 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Cognitive Outcomes During COVID-19 confiNemeNt in Elderly and Their Caregivers Using Technologies for DEMentia

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorFundación Pública Andaluza para la Investigación de Málaga en Biomedicina y SaludRan2020 to 2020Enrolled200ConditionsMild Cognitive Impairment, DementiaArmsTelephone interview
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Peter AnderbergDepartment of Health, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Karlskrona, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-9870-8477
Shahryar EivazzadehDepartment of Health, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Karlskrona, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-0316-548X
Johan Sanmartin BerglundDepartment of Health, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Karlskrona, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-4312-2246
Blekinge Institute of Technology · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of health technology by older people is coming increasingly in focus with the demographic changes. Health information technology is generally perceived as an important factor in enabling increased quality of life and reducing the cost of care for this group. Age-appropriate design and facilitation of technology adoption are important to ensure functionality and removal of various barriers to usage. Development of assessment tools and instruments for evaluating older persons' technology adoption and usage as well as measuring the effects of the interventions are of high priority. Both usability and acceptance of a specific technology or service are important factors in evaluating the impact of a health information technology intervention. Psychometric measures are seldom included in evaluations of health technology. However, basic attitudes and sentiments toward technology (eg, technophilia) could be argued to influence both the level of satisfaction with the technology itself as well as the perception of the health intervention outcome.

objectiveThe purpose of this study is to develop a reduced and refined instrument for measuring older people's attitudes and enthusiasm for technology based on relevant existing instruments for measuring technophilia. A requirement of the new instrument is that it should be short and simple to make it usable for evaluation of health technology for older people.

methodsInitial items for the TechPH questionnaire were drawn from a content analysis of relevant existing technophilia measure instruments. An exploratory factor analysis was conducted in a random selection of persons aged 65 years or older (N=374) on eight initial items. The scale was reduced to six items, and the internal consistency and reliability of the scale were examined. Further validation was made by a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).

resultsThe exploratory factor analysis resulted in two factors. These factors were analyzed and labeled techEnthusiasm and techAnxiety. They demonstrated relatively good internal consistency (Cronbach alpha=.72 and .68, respectively). The factors were confirmed in the CFA and showed good model fit (χ

conclusionsThe construed TechPH score showed expected relations to external real-world criteria, and the two factors showed interesting internal relations. Different technophilia personality traits distinguish clusters with different behaviors of adaptation as well as usage of new technology. Whether there is an independent association with the TechPH score against outcomes in health technology projects needs to be shown in further studies. The instrument must also be validated in different contexts, such as other countries.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAttitudeFemaleHumansMaleMedical InformaticsMiddle AgedPsychometricsQuality of LifeSurveys and QuestionnairesTelemedicineagingeHealthhealth technologyinternettechnophilia

Identifiers

PMID31124467
PMCPMC6552448
OpenAlexW2942303341

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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 OpenQuestion graph.