ArticleJournal of geriatric oncology2023
Exploring the acceptability of the 'smart cane' to support mobility in older cancer survivors and older adults: A mixed methods study.
Article in Journal of geriatric oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Study on the Acceptance of Smart Cane Technology Among Chinese Older Adults.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionApproximately 25% of older cancer survivors (i.e., ≥ 65 years, with cancer history) use ≥1 mobility device, surpassing usage by other older adults. Few tools exist for older "survivors" to regain function or follow lifestyle recommendations. Our goal was to explore opportunities to leverage technology-enabled mobility devices, such as the "smart cane," to support mobility goals in these survivors. The research objective was to assess perceptions related to acceptability, usability and preferences of participants regarding technology-enabled mobility devices in everyday life. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe used a convergent mixed-methods design, analyzing quantitative data followed by qualitative focus groups. A pre-survey derived from the Senior Technology Acceptance Model assessed the acceptability of technology-enabled devices among participants, who also participated in one of three focus groups delivered via Zoom. The Zoom sessions included facilitated 90-min discussions and video demonstration of the smart cane. Focus group sessions were recorded and transcribed verbatim and thematic content analysis was conducted.
resultsWe recruited 12 older US survivors. Participants were 58% female, aged 68-86, and 16% non-White. From a pre-survey of participants, 83% said that they liked the idea of technology-enhanced mobility device and 100% said they thought they could be skillful at using a technology-enabled device if training was provided. Though participants were enthusiastic about the smart cane overall and felt the smart cane supported independence for older adults, the themes revealed concerns about safety, accessibility and technology support, as well as the concern for negative impact on self-image due to use of a mobility device. There was a strong preference for working with clinical professionals as the most trusted sources for referrals, if a smart cane was suggested. DISCUSSION: Older survivors in our sample found the smart cane very acceptable, and supportive of independence for older adults with cancer and other conditions. Participants also provided many insights that revealed additional research needed to support access, safety and usability for older adults, older survivors and caregivers, especially by partnering with clinical professionals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.