Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38717339›Full record

ArticleJMIR aging2024

Technology Use Among Older Adults and Their Caregivers: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.

Shinduk Lee, Marcia G Ory, Deborah Vollmer Dahlke, Matthew Lee Smith

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR aging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Evaluating Human-Robot Interactions to Support Healthy Aging-in-Place.Journal of applied gerontology : the official journal of the Southern Gerontological Society · 2025
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Clinical Utility of an Occupational Therapist-Led Smart Home Modification Program: A Mixed-Methods Evaluation.The American journal of occupational therapy : official publication of the American Occupational Therapy Association
    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

4 authors.

Shinduk LeeCollege of Nursing, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1336-819X
Marcia G OryDepartment of Environmental and Occupational Health, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-8036-2383
Deborah Vollmer DahlkeCenter for Community Health and Aging, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1674-4998
Matthew Lee SmithCenter for Community Health and Aging, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-8232-9285

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Informal caregivers are called upon to provide substantial care, but more needs to be known about technology use among older adult and caregiver dyads. Objective: This study described technology use among older adults and their caregivers, explored potential correlates of technology use, and highlighted implications for practice. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among unpaid caregivers of older adults (n=486). Primary outcomes were self-reported technology (devices and functions) use among caregivers and their oldest care recipient. The concordance of technology use among caregivers and care recipients was also examined. Multivariable regression models were conducted separately for caregivers and care recipients. Results: Greater proportions of caregivers used all examined technologies, except for the medication alerts or tracking function, than care recipients. Caregivers used an average of 3.4 devices and 4.2 functions, compared to 1.8 devices and 1.6 functions used by their care recipients. Among caregivers, younger age, higher income, and higher education were associated with more technology use (P<.05). Among care recipients, younger age, not having cognitive dysfunction, and caregiver's technology use were associated with more technology use (P<.05). Conclusions: Understanding technology use patterns and device adoption across diverse caregiver and care recipient populations is increasingly important for enhancing geriatric care. Findings can guide recommendations about appropriate technology interventions and help providers communicate and share information more effectively with patients and their caregivers.

Indexed as

CaregiversAgedAged, 80 and overCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSelf ReportSurveys and QuestionnairesTechnologyadoptionageingagingcaregivercaregiverscaregivingcarerscomputer usecross-sectionaldevicedevicesdisparitiesdisparitydyaddyadselderelderlygeriatricgeriatricsgerontologyhealth disparitiesolder adultolder adultsolder peopleolder personsocial determinants of healthsurveysurveystechnologytechnology useusage

Identifiers

PMID38717339
PMCPMC11084119

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.