Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38365698›Full record

SynthesisBMC public health2024

Barriers and facilitators to health technology adoption by older adults with chronic diseases: an integrative systematic review.

Alessia Bertolazzi, Valeria Quaglia, Ramona Bongelli

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 199 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
199citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
–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

199 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Article

139 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Alessia BertolazziDepartment of Political Science, Communication and International Relations, University of Macerata, Don Minzoni street, 22, 62100, Macerata, Italy. alessia.bertolazzi@unimc.it.
Valeria QuagliaDepartment of Political Science, Communication and International Relations, University of Macerata, Don Minzoni street, 22, 62100, Macerata, Italy.
Ramona BongelliDepartment of Political Science, Communication and International Relations, University of Macerata, Don Minzoni street, 22, 62100, Macerata, Italy.

Funding

European Union - Next Generation EU ECS00000041 - VITALITY - CUP E13C22001060006
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn recent years, healthcare systems have progressively adopted several technologies enhancing access to healthcare for older adults and support the delivery of efficient and effective care for this specific population. These technologies include both assistive technologies designed to maintain or improve the independence, social participation and functionality of older people at home, as well as health information technology developed to manage long-term conditions. Examples of such technologies include telehealth, wearable devices and mobile health. However, despite the great promise that health technology holds for promoting independent living among older people, its actual implementation remains challenging.

methodsThis study aimed to conduct an integrative systematic review of the research evidence on the factors that facilitate or hinder the adoption of different types of technology by older individuals with chronic diseases. For this purpose, four electronic databases (PsycArticles, Scopus, Web of Science and PubMed) were queried to search for indexed published studies. The methodological quality of the selected papers has been assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT).

resultsTwenty-nine articles were selected, including 6.213 adults aged 60 or older. The studies have been synthesised considering the types of technological interventions and chronic diseases, as well as the main barriers and facilitators in technology acceptance. The results revealed that the majority of the selected articles focused on comorbid conditions and the utilisation of telemedicine tools. With regard to hindering and facilitating factors, five main domains were identified: demographic and socioeconomic, health-related, dispositional, technology-related and social factors.

conclusionThe study results have practical implications not only for technology developers but also for all the social actors involved in the design and implementation of healthcare technologies, including formal and informal caregivers and policy stakeholders. These actors could use this work to enhance their understanding of the utilisation of technology by the ageing population. This review emphasises the factors that facilitate technology adoption and identifies barriers that impede it, with the ultimate goal of promoting health and independent living.

Indexed as

TelemedicineAgedBiomedical TechnologyChronic DiseaseHumansMiddle AgedPatient Acceptance of Health CareChronic diseaseHealth information technologyHealth technologyOlder adultsTechnology adoptionTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID38365698
PMCPMC10873991

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.