Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41458888›Full record

ArticleInnovation in aging2025

Navigating the future of artificial intelligence technologies for improving the care of older adults.

Michael Abadir, William Dineen, Daniel Myers, Simone Yu, Phillip Phan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Innovation in aging, 2025. 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. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

5 authors.

Michael AbadirCollege of Computer, Mathematical, and Natural Sciences, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, United States.
William DineenMotorola Mobility, Chicago, Illinois, United States.
Daniel MyersCGS Administrators, Nashville, Tennessee, United States.
Simone YuSamueli School of Engineering, University of California, Los Angeles, California, United States.
Phillip PhanCarey Business School, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1366-1604

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rapid aging of the global population presents complex challenges for health systems, families, and societies. Artificial intelligence (AI) technologies-from predictive analytics and conversational agents to robotic caregivers and remote monitoring-offer scalable solutions to support older adults throughout their life courses. This article examines the evolving landscape of AI-enabled care for aging populations, structured around the geriatric 4Ms: what Matters, Medication, Mentation, and Mobility. We synthesize current evidence on the application of AI in personalized medicine, cognitive support, fall detection, and chronic disease management while exploring the cultural, economic, and policy contexts that influence technology adoption. The market for age-related technology is expanding; however, disparities in access, digital literacy, and algorithmic bias risk exacerbating inequities. We identify persistent gaps in implementation, including the underrepresentation of diverse older adults in training data sets, limited longitudinal studies, and a lack of integration across diagnostic and therapeutic systems. We propose a future research agenda centered on five priorities: (1) establishing life-course AI research agendas, (2) promoting inclusive and participatory development processes, (3) advancing gerontological design principles, (4) expanding AI literacy across the aging services workforce, and (5) developing robust ethical and regulatory infrastructures. The article calls for interdisciplinary collaboration among gerontologists, engineers, policymakers, and ethicists to ensure that AI innovations are safe, equitable, and responsive to the lived experiences of older adults. Ultimately, we argue that AI must be implemented not as isolated tools but as components of comprehensive care ecosystems that support aging in place, reduce caregiver burden, and preserve human dignity.

Indexed as

4MsHealthcare innovationHealthcare policyTechnology over the Aging Life Course

Identifiers

PMID41458888
PMCPMC12742854

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.