ReviewInnovation in aging2026
Digital technologies in care for older adults living alone: a scoping review.
Review in Innovation in aging, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objectives: The number of older adults living alone is increasing globally, often with varied risks and resilience capacities. Digital technologies may help mitigate these risks, but their potential remains poorly understood. This review maps evidence on digital technologies in social and health care interventions for older adults living alone, focusing on technology types, functions, intervention outcomes, integration into care, and associated benefits and challenges. Research Design and Methods: Studies from 2000 to 2025 were identified through systematic searches across 8 databases and gray literature, yielding 37 sources. A qualitative content analysis synthesized study characteristics and findings. Results: Five categories of digital technologies were identified, from communication tools to AI-powered devices. Most interventions were delivered through scheduled sessions led by care providers. Most reported positive health outcomes (e.g., improved physical function, psychological well-being, reduced loneliness, healthier behaviors, and better self-care), while evidence on service delivery effects remains limited. While technologies improved care accessibility and coordination, challenges included limited digital literacy, exclusion, and design flaws. Discussion and Implications: Knowledge gaps include limited geographical diversity, insufficient research on underrepresented groups (e.g., ethnic minorities and those with low socioeconomic status), a lack of intersectional analyses, limited evidence on cost-effectiveness, long-term outcomes, and effective intervention components. Future interventions should adopt participatory, person-centered approaches to strengthen equity and agency, alongside policy efforts to address structural barriers such as unequal access to digital care technologies.
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.