ArticleJMIR aging2023
Co-Creating a Digital Life-Integrated Self-Assessment for Older Adults: User Experience Study.
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 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Usage of the Tablet-Based "Keep On Keep Up" Digital Program and Resulting Changes in Physical Capacity and Real-World Walking in Community-Dwelling Older Adults: Process Evaluation.JMIR formative research · 2026Trial
- Digital home-based physical activity promotion for older adults after total hip arthroplasty: protocol for the randomized controlled iPATH trial.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Cognitive Recovery After Poststroke Delirium (RECOVER): Protocol for a Longitudinal Multimodal Study on Cognitive Assessment in Patients With Stroke.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- An efficiency assessment of digital technology empowering healthy aging in China: an empirical study of the "internet plus nursing services" pilot program based on the DEA model.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Designing interfaces for digital physical ability self-assessment: a user-centered iterative approach.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Toward Inclusive Design Heuristics for Digital Health Interventions for the Aging Population: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- A Smartphone-Based Timed Up and Go Test Self-Assessment for Older Adults: Validity and Reliability Study.JMIR aging · 2025Article
- WORKWELL process evaluation: qualitative data analyses of the participant interviews at 12- and 36-month follow-ups.Rheumatology advances in practice · 2025Article
- [Care models for older people based on a case study-Geriatrics as an active discipline].Innere Medizin (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOlder adults are at increased risk of developing health disorders and functional decline. However, owing to time constraints and considerable effort, physicians rarely conduct comprehensive assessments to detect early signs of negative trajectories. If designed properly, digital technologies could identify health risks already at a preclinical stage, thereby facilitating preventive efforts and targeted intervention. For this purpose, a Life-integrated Self-Assessment (LiSA) tablet system will be developed through a structured co-creation process.
objectiveThis study aims to investigate older adults' perceptions of different self-assessment domains, components affecting user experience, risks and benefits associated with LiSA, characteristics of potential LiSA users, and the LiSA concept in general.
methodsA total of 10 community-dwelling older adults aged ≥70 years were recruited. In total, 6 co-creation workshops were held and started with expert input followed by semistructured discussion rounds. Participants performed hands-on activities with a tablet, including testing of preinstalled self-assessment apps. All workshops were audio recorded and additionally documented by the researchers using flipcharts, notes, and photos. Qualitative content analysis was used to analyze the data following a deductive-inductive approach guided by the Optimized Honeycomb Model for user experience.
resultsThe group (mean age 77.8, SD 5.1 years) was heterogeneous in terms of previous technology experience and health status. The mean workshop duration was 2 hours (122.5, SD 4.43 min), and an average of 8 (SD 1.15) participants attended each workshop. A total of 11 thematic categories were identified, covering results on all research questions. Participants emphasized a strong interest in conducting a digital self-assessment of physical activity and function and sensory and cognitive functions and requested additional features such as recommendations for actions or reminders. LiSA was perceived as empowering and a motivator to engage in active health care planning as well as enabling shared and informed decision-making. Concerns and barriers included the lack of technical competence, feelings of frustration, and fear of being left alone, with negative assessment results. In essence, participants expressed a positive attitude toward using LiSA repeatedly and identified it as an option to increase the chances of maintaining independence when growing older.
conclusionsThe co-creation participants supported the LiSA approach and were interested in performing regular self-assessments on a long-term basis. In their opinion, LiSA should include relevant assessments capturing physical activity and function and sensory and cognitive functions as well as recommendations for actions. It should be customizable to individual needs. These results will form the basis for a prototype. Iterative development and validation will aim to make LiSA accessible in the public domain as a reliable tablet-based system for self-assessment.
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.