Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37191985›Full record

ArticleJMIR aging2023

Adapting Transportation Planning e-Tools to Older Adults' Needs: Scoping Review.

Sahar Tahir, Bessam Abdulrazak, Dany Baillargeon, Catherine Girard, Véronique Provencher

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR aging, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Sahar Tahir *AMbient Intelligence Lab, Département Informatique, Faculty of Science, University of Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-9488-0049
Bessam Abdulrazak *AMbient Intelligence Lab, Département Informatique, Faculty of Science, University of Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5468-0190
Dany Baillargeon *Research Center on Aging, Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de l'Estrie, Centre hospitalier universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0755-2946
Catherine Girard *Research Center on Aging, Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de l'Estrie, Centre hospitalier universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3839-0580
Véronique Provencher *Research Center on Aging, Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de l'Estrie, Centre hospitalier universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8211-7135

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAging is often accompanied by a decrease in physical and sensory capacities and financial resources, which makes travel and the use of public transport a big challenge for older adults. These mobility limitations may prevent them from going out for groceries, medical appointments, or entertainment, which increases the risk of social isolation. A key element in helping older adults to maintain healthy aging and social engagement is to foster autonomy, freedom, and active mobility. A transportation planning e-tool can provide older adults with information about transport and trip options. There are many transportation planning e-tools, but little is known about whether and how their characteristics and functionalities address older adults' needs and preferences.

objectiveThis study aims to map existing transportation e-tools and identify gaps to be filled in order to match their functionalities with older adults' needs and preferences.

methodsA scoping review of existing transportation planning e-tools was conducted based on the approach developed by Arksey and O'Malley. A search in the scientific literature (Academic Search Complete, MEDLINE, CINAHL, SocINDEX, and ERIC) as well as gray literature (TRID Database, Google Scholar, Proquest, Google Play, etc) was conducted in June 2020 and updated 3 times; in September 2021, December 2021, and May 2022. After the studies were selected, a comparative analysis was performed by 2 evaluators; an occupational therapy student and a computer science student. These e-tools were analyzed with respect to some characteristics (eg, tool's development status, target customers, and geographic coverage) as well as 10 functionalities (time autonomy, walkability, crowd avoidance, incline avoidance, weather consideration, dark avoidance, winter obstacles avoidance, amenities inclusion, taxi driver's information, and support affordance) that we defined based on older adults' needs and preferences (mainly Canadians). These needs were identified from a literature review and confirmed by workshops (focus groups).

resultsThe scientific and gray literature search yielded 463 sources, and 42 transportation e-tools were included. None of the e-tools reviewed addresses all 10 functionalities. More specifically, functionalities such as dark avoidance and support affordance were not addressed by any of the included e-tools.

conclusionsMost of the e-tools currently available to plan trips do not address older adults' needs and preferences. The results of this scoping review helped fill this gap by identifying functionalities to include in transportation planning e-tools designed to promote active aging. The findings of this study highlight the need to use a multicriteria optimization algorithm to address older adults' mobility needs and preferences. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/33894.

Indexed as

active aging, transportationCanadian mobility experiencee-toolreviewuser-centered

Identifiers

PMID37191985
PMCPMC10230352

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.