Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39671589›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2024

Perspectives on Technology Use in the Context of Caregiving for Persons With Dementia: Qualitative Interview Study.

Karl S Grewal, Rory Gowda-Sookochoff, Shelley Peacock, Allison Cammer, Lachlan A McWilliams, Raymond J Spiteri, Kristen R Haase, Mary Harrison, Lorraine Holtslander, Rhoda MacRae and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Smartphone use in older adults with dementia.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Case Reports in the Integration of Technology with Cognitive Rehabilitation for Individuals with Memory Concerns and Their Care Partners.Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists · 2025
    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

13 authors.

Karl S GrewalDepartment of Psychology and Health Studies, College of Arts and Science, University of Saskatchewan, Sasktoon, SK, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-5259-0979
Rory Gowda-SookochoffDepartment of Psychology and Health Studies, College of Arts and Science, University of Saskatchewan, Sasktoon, SK, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6542-8292
Shelley PeacockCollege of Nursing, University of Saskatchewan, Sasktoon, SK, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2365-1418
Allison CammerCollege of Pharmacy and Nutrition, University of Saskatchewan, Sasktoon, SK, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4965-4112
Lachlan A McWilliamsDepartment of Psychology and Health Studies, College of Arts and Science, University of Saskatchewan, Sasktoon, SK, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-1000-5900
Raymond J SpiteriDepartment of Computer Science, University of Saskatchewan, Sasktoon, SK, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3513-6237
Kristen R HaaseSchool of Nursing, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-4457-2110
Mary HarrisonCollege of Nursing, University of Saskatchewan, Sasktoon, SK, Canada.ORCID 0009-0009-0948-0913
Lorraine HoltslanderCollege of Nursing, University of Saskatchewan, Sasktoon, SK, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8641-150X
Rhoda MacRaeSchool of Health and Life Sciences, University of the West of Scotland, Lanarkshire, Scotland, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9972-7506
Joanne MichaelPrograms and Services, Alzheimer Society of Saskatchewan, Regina, SK, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6150-2870
Shoshana GreenDepartment of Psychology and Health Studies, College of Arts and Science, University of Saskatchewan, Sasktoon, SK, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3968-6754
Megan E O'ConnellDepartment of Psychology and Health Studies, College of Arts and Science, University of Saskatchewan, Sasktoon, SK, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6159-4322

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExamining ways to support persons with dementia and their caregivers to help minimize the disease's impact on individuals, families, and society is critical. One emerging avenue for support is technology (eg, smartphones and smart homes).

objectiveGiven the increasing presence of technology in caregiving, it is pertinent to appreciate whether and how technology can be most useful to a care partner's everyday life. This study aims to further understand care partner technology use, attitudes, and the potential role of off-the-shelf technologies (eg, smartphones and smart homes) in supporting caregiving from the perspective of care partners for persons with dementia.

methodsWe conducted a telephone cross-sectional survey using random digit dialing with 67 self-identified care partners of persons with dementia across one Canadian province. Participants were asked about attitudes toward technology, barriers to and facilitators for technology use, technology use with caregiving, and demographic information. Eight open-ended questions were analyzed using content analysis; 2 closed-ended questions about comfort with and helpfulness of technology (rated on a scale of 1 to 10) were analyzed with frequencies. From these data, an in-depth semistructured interview was created, and 10 (15%) randomly sampled care partners from the initial collection of 67 care partners were interviewed approximately 1 year later, with responses analyzed using content analysis.

resultsFrequency analysis rated on a scale of 1 to 10 suggested that care partners were comfortable with technology (wearable technology mean 7.94, SD 2.02; smart home technology mean 6.94, SD 2.09), although they rated the helpfulness of technology less strongly (mean 5.02, SD 2.85). Qualitatively, care partners described using technology for functional tasks and some caregiving. Barriers to technology use included cost, lack of knowledge, security or privacy concerns, and undesirable features of technology. Facilitators included access to support and the presence of desirable features. Some care partners described merging technology with caregiving and reported subsequent benefits. Others stated that technology could not be adopted for caregiving due to the degree of impairment, fear of negative consequences for the person living with dementia, or due to incongruity with the caregiving philosophy. Furthermore, care partners noted that their technology use either increased or was unchanged as they moved through the COVID-19 pandemic.

conclusionsThe 2 analyses were conducted separately, but there was notable overlap in the data, suggesting temporal stability of identified content. Both analyses suggested care partners' relative comfort with technology and its use, but other care partners noted concerns about integrating technology and caregiving. Care partners' reports of increased technology use throughout the COVID-19 pandemic may also suggest that the pandemic impacted their perceptions of the usefulness of technology, being influenced by the requirements of their reality. Future investigations should examine how to support care partners in adopting relevant technology.

Indexed as

CaregiversDementiaQualitative ResearchAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCanadaCOVID-19Cross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and Questionnairesassistive technologycaregivingcare partnercontent analysisdementiamobile phonesupporttechnologytechnology adoption

Identifiers

PMID39671589
PMCPMC11681293

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.