Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32755894›Full record

ArticleJMIR serious games2020

User Experience of Interactive Technologies for People With Dementia: Comparative Observational Study.

Luis Duarte Andrade Ferreira, Henrique Ferreira, Sofia Cavaco, Mónica Cameirão, Sergi Bermúdez I Badia

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR serious games, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. PeerJ. Computer science · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Virtual reality to promote wellbeing in persons with dementia: A scoping review.Journal of rehabilitation and assistive technologies engineering
    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

5 authors.

Luis Duarte Andrade FerreiraNOVA LINCS, Dep de Informática, Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9840-5767
Henrique FerreiraMadeira Interactive Technologies Institute, Universidade Madeira, Funchal, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3533-8151
Sofia CavacoNOVA LINCS, Dep de Informática, Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7315-4543
Mónica CameirãoNOVA LINCS, Dep de Informática, Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5352-0128
Sergi Bermúdez I BadiaNOVA LINCS, Dep de Informática, Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4452-0414

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSerious games (SGs) are used as complementary approaches to stimulate patients with dementia. However, many of the SGs use out-of-the-shelf technologies that may not always be suitable for such populations, as they can lead to negative behaviors, such as anxiety, fatigue, and even cybersickness.

objectiveThis study aims to evaluate how patients with dementia interact and accept 5 out-of-the-shelf technologies while completing 10 virtual reality tasks.

methodsA total of 12 participants diagnosed with dementia (mean age 75.08 [SD 8.07] years, mean Mini-Mental State Examination score 17.33 [SD 5.79], and mean schooling 5.55 [SD 3.30]) at a health care center in Portugal were invited to participate in this study. A within-subject experimental design was used to allow all participants to interact with all technologies, such as HTC VIVE, head-mounted display (HMD), tablet, mouse, augmented reality (AR), leap motion (LM), and a combination of HMD with LM. Participants' performance was quantified through behavioral and verbal responses, which were captured through video recordings and written notes.

resultsThe findings of this study revealed that the user experience using technology was dependent on the patient profile; the patients had a better user experience when they use technologies with direct interaction configuration as opposed to indirect interaction configuration in terms of assistance required (P=.01) and comprehension (P=.01); the participants did not trigger any emotional responses when using any of the technologies; the participants' performance was task-dependent; the most cost-effective technology was the mouse, whereas the least cost-effective was AR; and all the technologies, except for one (HMD with LM), were not exposed to external hazards.

conclusionsMost participants were able to perform tasks using out-of-the-shelf technologies. However, there is no perfect technology, as they are not explicitly designed to address the needs and skills of people with dementia. Here, we propose a set of guidelines that aim to help health professionals and engineers maximize user experience when using such technologies for the population with dementia.

Indexed as

costs and cost analysisdementiaequipment safetyinteractionpsychomotor performancetechnologyuser-computer interface

Identifiers

PMID32755894
PMCPMC7439148

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.