Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36991423›Full record

SynthesisBMC medical ethics2023

Mapping ethical issues in the use of smart home health technologies to care for older persons: a systematic review.

Nadine Andrea Felber, Yi Jiao Angelina Tian, Félix Pageau, Bernice Simone Elger, Tenzin Wangmo

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medical ethics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
46.1field-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.

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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Nadine Andrea FelberInstitute of Biomedical Ethics, University of Basel, Bernoullistrasse 28, 4056, Basel, Switzerland. nadine.felber@unibas.ch.ORCID 0000-0001-8207-2996
Yi Jiao Angelina TianInstitute of Biomedical Ethics, University of Basel, Bernoullistrasse 28, 4056, Basel, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-2969-9655
Félix PageauFaculty of Medicine, Université Laval, 1050 Av. de la Médecine, G1V0A6, Québec, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-4249-7399
Bernice Simone ElgerInstitute of Biomedical Ethics, University of Basel, Bernoullistrasse 28, 4056, Basel, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-0857-0510
Tenzin WangmoInstitute of Biomedical Ethics, University of Basel, Bernoullistrasse 28, 4056, Basel, Switzerland.
University of Basel · CHUniversité Laval · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe worldwide increase in older persons demands technological solutions to combat the shortage of caregiving and to enable aging in place. Smart home health technologies (SHHTs) are promoted and implemented as a possible solution from an economic and practical perspective. However, ethical considerations are equally important and need to be investigated.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review according to the PRISMA guidelines to investigate if and how ethical questions are discussed in the field of SHHTs in caregiving for older persons.

results156 peer-reviewed articles published in English, German and French were retrieved and analyzed across 10 electronic databases. Using narrative analysis, 7 ethical categories were mapped: privacy, autonomy, responsibility, human vs. artificial interactions, trust, ageism and stigma, and other concerns.

conclusionThe findings of our systematic review show the (lack of) ethical consideration when it comes to the development and implementation of SHHTs for older persons. Our analysis is useful to promote careful ethical consideration when carrying out technology development, research and deployment to care for older persons. REGISTRATION: We registered our systematic review in the PROSPERO network under CRD42021248543.

Indexed as

Independent LivingMedicineAgedAged, 80 and overHumansPrivacyTechnologyAgingBiomedical ethicsCaregivingHealth technologyOlder personsReviewSmart home

Identifiers

PMID36991423
PMCPMC10061702
OpenAlexW4361285840

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.