Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33292707›Full record

ReviewPublic health reviews2020

How can technology support ageing in place in healthy older adults? A systematic review.

Aline Ollevier, Gabriel Aguiar, Marco Palomino, Ingeborg Sylvia Simpelaere

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Public health reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing 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

55 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Person-Centered Technology for Older Adults: Benefits, Limitations, and Considerations in Design and Use.Journal of applied gerontology : the official journal of the Southern Gerontological Society · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Towards Caring Technologies in Older Adult Care Through the Co-Creation of an Ethical Process Guide.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Evaluating Human-Robot Interactions to Support Healthy Aging-in-Place.Journal of applied gerontology : the official journal of the Southern Gerontological Society · 2025
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

4 authors.

Aline OllevierVIVES University of Applied Sciences-Campus Bruges, Xaverianenstraat 10, Brugge, Belgium. aline.ollevier@vives.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0283-9286
Gabriel AguiarSchool of Engineering, Computing and Mathematics, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.
Marco PalominoSchool of Engineering, Computing and Mathematics, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.
Ingeborg Sylvia SimpelaereVIVES University of Applied Sciences-Campus Bruges, Xaverianenstraat 10, Brugge, Belgium.

Funding

Interreg 2S05-014
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAgeing in place has recently gained visibility in healthcare policies and services. Technology has the potential to facilitate independence at home. The objective of this systematic review is to identify technologies that have been rigorously evaluated for supporting the ageing in place of healthy older adults. As well we explored the methods in engagement with technology in healthy older adults.

methodsDatabases Pubmed, Scopus, PsycInfo and Cinahl were consulted for clinical controlled trials or randomised controlled trials between 2014 and 2019. Studies were included if they contained a technological intervention and focussed on supporting healthy older adults' independent living. PRISMA guidelines and the risk of bias tool of the Cochrane Collaboration were applied.

resultsThe search identified 3662 articles of which only 7 made the final analysis. Through narrative analysis, technologies were categorised into three groups: accessible communication, emergency assistance and physical and mental well-being. Patient-centredness was extensively addressed by exploring how the participants engaged in the development and evaluation of the technology and how they were trained and monitored.

conclusionsLiterature concerning technology to support ageing, based on controlled trials and research performed in authentic home situations, is scarce. Thus, there is a need to investigate the subject in depth. The use of a neurofeedback headband, an accessible computer system, a wristband with pedometer, a biofeedback device and an online video platform can bring added value to ageing in place for healthy older adults. A patient-centred approach for developing, implementing and evaluating technology benefits ageing in place.

Indexed as

Ageing in placeOlder adultPatient-centredTechnology

Identifiers

PMID33292707
PMCPMC7684947

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.