ArticleJMIR aging2025
Examining Technology Perspectives of Older Adults With Mild Cognitive Impairment: Scoping Review.
Article in JMIR aging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) affects up to 20% of people older than the age of 65 years. The global incidence of MCI is increasing, and technology is being explored for early intervention. Theories of technology adoption predict that useful and easy-to-use solutions will have higher rates of adoption; however, these models do not specifically consider older adults with cognitive impairments or the unique human-computer interaction challenges posed by MCI. There are gaps in understanding the combined impacts of aging and cognitive impairment on factors affecting technology adoption for older adults with MCI, and it is not clear how MCI impacts human-computer interaction and device and interaction modality preferences in this population. Objective: This study aimed to collate perspectives from older adults with MCI about technology solutions proposed for them, to understand whether solutions are perceived as useful, easy to use, and what changes are suggested. It also identifies which devices and interaction modalities are preferred, and other factors that may affect usage and adoption. Methods: This scoping review was completed according to the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. A consistent search was performed across 9 electronic databases (ACM Digital Library, EBSCOhost CINAHL Plus with Full Text, EBSCOhost Computers and Applied Sciences Complete, Google Scholar, JMIR Publications, IEEE Xplore, EBSCOhost MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection) for studies published between January 1, 2014, and May 1, 2024. Extracted data were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. Results: We identified 4271 studies, and after the removal of duplicates and screening, 83 studies were included for data extraction. Inductive thematic analysis of feedback from older adults with MCI about technology solutions proposed for them identified five themes: (1) purpose and need, (2) solution design and ease of use, (3) self-impression, (4) lifestyle, and (5) interaction modality. Solutions were perceived as useful, even though gaps in functional support exist; however, they were not perceived as entirely easy to use due to issues related to usability and user experience. Devices that are lightweight, portable, familiar, and have large screens are preferred, as is multimodal interaction-particularly speech, visual or text, and touch. Conclusions: Using technology can create feelings that positively or negatively affect a user's comfort, confidence, and overall well-being. Older adults with MCI value independence and autonomy, and solution designs should support these. Usefulness, ease of use, security, privacy, cost, physical comfort, and convenience are important considerations for technology use. Reliable technology creates trust, confidence, and feelings of empowerment. This review recommends future work to (1) improve usability and user experience, (2) enhance personalization, (3) better understand interaction preferences and effectiveness, (4) enable options for multimodal interaction, and (5) more seamlessly integrate solutions into users' lifestyles.
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.