Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38858634›Full record

ArticleBMC geriatrics2024

Digital home care interventions and quality of primary care for older adults: a scoping review.

Ísis de Siqueira Silva, Aguinaldo José de Araújo, Rayssa Horácio Lopes, Cícera Renata Diniz Vieira Silva, Pedro Bezerra Xavier, Renan Cabral de Figueirêdo, Ewerton William Gomes Brito, Luís Velez Lapão, Cláudia Santos Martiniano, Vilani Medeiros de Araújo Nunes and 1 more

Erratum issuedAbstract readScoping Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC geriatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Digital Health and Primary Health Care Quality: A Survey Case Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Ísis de Siqueira SilvaPostgraduate in Collective Health, Federal University of Rio Grande Do Norte, Natal, Brazil. isis1998.siqueira.silva@gmail.com.
Aguinaldo José de AraújoPostgraduate in Collective Health, Federal University of Rio Grande Do Norte, Natal, Brazil.
Rayssa Horácio LopesHealth School, Federal University of Rio Grande Do Norte, Natal, Brazil.
Cícera Renata Diniz Vieira SilvaTechnical School of Health of Cajazeiras, Teacher Training Center, Universidade Federal of Campina Grande, Cajazeiras, Brazil.
Pedro Bezerra XavierPostgraduate in Health Sciences, Federal University of Rio Grande Do Norte, Natal, Brazil.
Renan Cabral de FigueirêdoPostgraduate in Family Health, Federal University of Rio Grande Do Norte, Natal, Brazil.
Ewerton William Gomes BritoPublic Health Department, Federal University of Rio Grande Do Norte, Natal, Brazil.
Luís Velez LapãoWHO Collaborating Center on Health Workforce Policy and Planning, IHMT, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.
Cláudia Santos MartinianoDepartment of Nursing, State University of Paraíba, Campina Grande, Brazil.
Vilani Medeiros de Araújo NunesPublic Health Department, Federal University of Rio Grande Do Norte, Natal, Brazil.
Severina Alice da Costa UchôaPublic Health Department, Federal University of Rio Grande Do Norte, Natal, Brazil.

Funding

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPopulation aging is forcing the transformation of health care. Long-term care in the home is complex and involves complex communication with primary care services. In this scenario, the expansion of digital health has the potential to improve access to home-based primary care; however, the use of technologies can increase inequalities in access to health for an important part of the population. The aim of this study was to identify and map the uses and types of digital health interventions and their impacts on the quality of home-based primary care for older adults.

methodsThis is a broad and systematized scoping review with rigorous synthesis of knowledge directed by the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). The quantitative data were analyzed through descriptive statistics, and the qualitative data were analyzed through basic qualitative content analysis, considering the organizational, relational, interpersonal and technical dimensions of care. The preliminary results were subjected to consultation with stakeholders to identify strengths and limitations, as well as potential forms of socialization.

resultsThe mapping showed the distribution of publications in 18 countries and in the Sub-Saharan Africa region. Older adults have benefited from the use of different digital health strategies; however, this review also addresses limitations and challenges, such as the need for digital literacy and technological infrastructure. In addition to the impacts of technologies on the quality of health care.

conclusionsThe review gathered priority themes for the equitable implementation of digital health, such as access to home caregivers and digital tools, importance of digital literacy and involvement of patients and their caregivers in health decisions and design of technologies, which must be prioritized to overcome limitations and challenges, focusing on improving quality of life, shorter hospitalization time and autonomy of older adults.

Indexed as

Home Care ServicesPrimary Health CareAgedHumansQuality of Health CareTelemedicineDigital healthGeriatric careHome-based primary carePrimary health careQuality in healthcareScoping review

Identifiers

PMID38858634
PMCPMC11163791

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.