Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38854853›Full record

ArticleInnovation in aging2024

The Benefits of Technology for Engaging Aging Adults: Findings From the PRISM 2.0 Trial.

Sara J Czaja, Neil Charness, Wendy A Rogers, Joseph Sharit, Jerad H Moxley, Walter R Boot

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Innovation in aging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03116399 (PRISM 2.0 in Diverse Living Contexts With Diverse Populations of Older Adults), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 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.

NCT03116399 nacompletednot on this map

PRISM 2.0 in Diverse Living Contexts With Diverse Populations of Older Adults

TypeinterventionalSponsorWeill Medical College of Cornell UniversityRan2017 to 2021Enrolled248ConditionsSocial Isolation in Older AdultsArmsPRISM 2.0 Condition, Tablet Condition
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The Benefits of a Digital Exercise Intervention for Older Adults: Findings From the Fittle Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of applied gerontology : the official journal of the Southern Gerontological Society · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

6 authors.

Sara J CzajaCenter on Aging and Behavioral Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York, USA.
Neil CharnessDepartment of Psychology, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1002-3439
Wendy A RogersCollege of Applied Health Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0787-2130
Joseph SharitCollege of Engineering, University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida, USA.
Jerad H MoxleyCenter on Aging and Behavioral Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York, USA.
Walter R BootCenter on Aging and Behavioral Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York, USA.

Funding

Understanding Issues Surrounding Technology Uptake and the Influence of Technology and Decision Making in Older AdultsP01AG017211 · NIA · WEILL MEDICAL COLL OF CORNELL UNIV · PI CZAJA, SARA J · 1999 to 2019
$26.6M
Project 3: Technology Tools for Cognitive Support for Health Management Activities for Aging Adults with and without Mild Cognitive ImpairmentP01AG073090 · NIA · WEILL MEDICAL COLL OF CORNELL UNIV · PI JOSEPH SHARIT · 2022 to 2026
$17.6M
NIA NIH HHS P01 AG017211NIA NIH HHS P01 AG073090
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Technology has potential for providing support for aging adults. This study evaluated the Personal Reminder Information and Social Management 2.0 (PRISM 2.0) software, in terms of enhancing social engagement and quality of life, and decreasing loneliness among older adults. Research Design and Methods: The randomized field trial conducted in diverse living contexts (rural locations, senior housing, and assisted living communities [ALC]). Two hundred and forty-five adults, aged 64 to 99 years, were randomly assigned to the PRISM 2.0 (integrated software system designed for aging through an iterative design process) or a Standard Tablet (without PRISM) Control condition, where participants received the same amount of contact and training as those in the PRISM 2.0 condition. Primary outcomes included measures of loneliness, social support, social connectedness, and quality of life. Secondary outcomes included measures of social isolation, mobile device proficiency, and technology readiness. Data were collected at baseline and 6 and 9 months postrandomization. This article focuses on the 6-month outcomes due to coronavirus disease 2019-related data challenges at 9 months. Results: Contrary to our hypothesis, participants in rural locations and senior housing in both conditions reported less loneliness and social isolation, and greater social support and quality of life at 6 months, and an increase in mobile device proficiency. Participants in the ALCs in both conditions also evidenced an increase in mobile device proficiency. Improvements in quality of life and health-related quality of life were associated with decreases in loneliness. Discussion and Implications: This study provides compelling evidence about the benefits of technology for older adults in terms of enhancing social outcomes and quality of life. However, the findings also underscore that for technology applications to be successful, they need to be adapted to the abilities and needs of the user group and instructional support needs to be provided. Clinical Trials Registration #: NCT03116399.

Indexed as

Living environmentLonelinessSocial engagementTechnology access

Identifiers

PMID38854853
PMCPMC11154146

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.