ArticleJMIR aging2026
Developing Digital Platforms to Help Older Adults Stay Physically and Socially Active: Co-Design Study to Develop a Toolkit and Evaluate Its Impact.
Article in JMIR 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Digital technologies have the potential to support physical, cognitive, and social activity among older adults, but many small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) lack the resources to conduct meaningful co-design with older adults. Toolkits derived from rigorous co-design processes may offer a scalable mechanism for translating end-user priorities into real-world product development. Objective: The Generating Older Active Lives Digitally study aimed primarily to engage older adults in a co-design process to identify priorities for digital technologies that support physical activity and reminiscence. Secondary objectives were to (1) translate these findings into a practical developer-facing toolkit, and (2) evaluate the toolkit's perceived utility and influence among digital technology SMEs. Methods: A total of 157 participants (121 older, 7 younger, and 29 staff) across 15 community and care settings in England and Scotland engaged in 106 technology interaction sessions, 22 evaluation focus groups, and 10 co-design workshops. These involved more than 20 digital technologies. Thematic analysis and structured card-ranking tasks were used to derive their priorities. Preliminary toolkits were co-designed and used by 10 UK-based SMEs who received small grants to apply the toolkit to active development projects. Their reports and follow-up interviews were analyzed thematically to identify perceived impacts on design decisions, product adaptations, and business outcomes. Results: Co-design activities generated 7 cross-cutting themes: motivation, content, barriers, design and inclusivity, suitability, acceptability, and motivations to use. These were organized into 3 toolkit sections: general design principles, online physical-activity platforms, and virtual reality. SMEs reported that the toolkits enhanced understanding of older adults' needs, validated design decisions, and inspired some new features. Perceived impacts included improved usability, expanded accessibility options, increased content variety, clearer instructional design, enhanced social components, and reduced operational costs. SMEs also reported some business benefits, including strengthened cases for investment and increased product uptake. Conclusions: Co-designed toolkits may offer a useful and cost-effective mechanism for translating older adults' priorities into digital product development. SMEs perceived this toolkit as practical, relevant, and impactful for informing design choices. This approach may complement, but does not replace, direct user involvement. It may help accelerate inclusive digital-health innovation for aging populations.
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.