SynthesisJMIR aging2025
Patient-Related Barriers to Digital Technology Adoption in Alzheimer Disease: Systematic Review.
Synthesis in JMIR aging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Mapping global inequities in telemedicine implementation: An umbrella review of barriers and facilitators.PloS one · 2026Pooled it
- More than Just a Game: A Longitudinal Pilot Study on the Outcome Effects of Home-Based Digital Cognitive Rehabilitation in Outpatients with Mild Cognitive Impairment.Brain sciences · 2026Article
- CareMobi to Improve Communication Between Caregivers and Adult Day Centers for People With Dementia: Mixed Methods Feasibility Study.JMIR aging · 2026Article
- AI-enabled digital phenotyping for Alzheimer's disease: a review of multimodal sensor integration and symptom trajectories.Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2026Review
- Accelerating digital innovation in clinical neuropsychology: simulation approach to support medical device certification.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Digital technology in dementia is an area of great development with varying experiences across countries. However, novel digital solutions often lack a patient-oriented perspective, and several relevant barriers prevent their use in clinics. Objective: In this study, we reviewed the existing literature on knowledge, familiarity, and competence in using digital technology and on attitude and experiences with digital tools in Alzheimer disease. The main research question is whether digital competence and attitudes of patients and caregivers may affect the adoption of digital technology. Methods: Following the PRISMA guidelines, a literature search was conducted by two researchers in the group. Inter-rater reliability was calculated with Cohen κ statistics. The risk of bias assessment was also recorded. Results: Of 597 initial records, only 18 papers were considered eligible. Analyses of inter-rater reliability showed good agreement levels. Significant heterogeneity in study design, sample features, and measurement tools emerged across studies. Quality assessment showed a middle-high overall quality of evidence. The main factors affecting the adoption of digital technology in patients and caregivers are severity of cognitive deficits, timing of adoption, and the availability of training and support. Additional factors are age, type of digital device, and ease of use of the digital solution. Conclusions: Adoption of digital technology in dementia is hampered by many patient-related barriers. Improving digital competence in patient-caregiver dyads and implementing systematic, patient-oriented strategies for the development and use of digital tools are needed for a successful incorporation of digital technology in memory clinics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.