Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31581632›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2019

Inclusion of Older Adults in the Research and Design of Digital Technology.

Ittay Mannheim, Ella Schwartz, Wanyu Xi, Sandra C Buttigieg, Mary McDonnell-Naughton, Eveline J M Wouters, Yvonne van Zaalen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 94 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
94citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

94 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. 'Such a lot of bother': Qualitative results of a home trial of a wearable electronic vision enhancement system for people with age-related macular degeneration.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2025
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. High intensity interval training for older adults - from the laboratory towards a home setting: a co-creation study.European review of aging and physical activity : official journal of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

34 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

7 authors.

Ittay MannheimSchool of Allied Health Professions, Fontys University of Applied Science, Eindhoven 5631 BN, The Netherlands. ittay.mannheim@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-4304-433X
Ella SchwartzLouis and Gabi Weisfeld School of Social Work, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan 5290002, Israel. ella.schwartz1@mail.huji.ac.il.ORCID 0000-0001-9623-1820
Wanyu XiLouis and Gabi Weisfeld School of Social Work, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan 5290002, Israel. wanyu.xi@biu.ac.il.
Sandra C ButtigiegHealth Services Management, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Malta, Msida MSD 2090, Malta. sandra.buttigieg@um.edu.mt.
Mary McDonnell-NaughtonDepartment of Nursing and Health Care Athlone Institute of Technology, Athlone N37 HD68, Ireland. mmcdonnell@ait.ie.
Eveline J M WoutersSchool of Allied Health Professions, Fontys University of Applied Science, Eindhoven 5631 BN, The Netherlands. e.wouters@fontys.nl.
Yvonne van ZaalenSchool of Allied Health Professions, Fontys University of Applied Science, Eindhoven 5631 BN, The Netherlands. y.vanzaalen@fontys.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Digital technology holds a promise to improve older adults' well-being and promote ageing in place. However, there seems to be a discrepancy between digital technologies that are developed and what older adults actually want and need. Ageing is stereotypically framed as a problem needed to be fixed, and older adults are considered to be frail and incompetent. Not surprisingly, many of the technologies developed for the use of older adults focus on care. The exclusion of older adults from the research and design of digital technology is often based on such negative stereotypes. In this opinion article, we argue that the inclusion rather than exclusion of older adults in the design process and research of digital technology is essential if technology is to fulfill the promise of improving well-being. We emphasize why this is important while also providing guidelines, evidence from the literature, and examples on how to do so. We unequivocally state that designers and researchers should make every effort to ensure the involvement of older adults in the design process and research of digital technology. Based on this paper, we suggest that ageism in the design process of digital technology might play a role as a possible barrier of adopting technology.

Indexed as

Attitude to ComputersStereotypingAgedAged, 80 and overAgeismCommunity ParticipationFemaleHumansInventionsMaleResearch Designageismdigital technologyethicsinclusionolder adults

Identifiers

PMID31581632
PMCPMC6801827

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.