This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

61/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Digital health tools

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

There is increasing interest in the use of technology to support social health in dementia. The primary objective of this systematic review was to synthesize evidence of effectiveness of digital technologies used by people with dementia to improve self-management and social participation. Records published from 1 January 2007 to 9 April 2020 were identified from Pubmed, PsycInfo, Web of Science, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Controlled interventional studies evaluating interventions based on any digital technology were included if: primary users of the technology had dementia or mild cognitive impairment (MCI); and the study reported outcomes relevant to self-management or social participation. Studies were clustered by population, intervention, and outcomes, and narrative synthesis was undertaken. Of 1394 records identified, nine met the inclusion criteria: two were deemed to be of poor methodological quality, six of fair quality, and one of good quality. Three clusters of technologies were identified: virtual reality, wearables, and software applications. We identified weak evidence that digital technologies may provide less benefit to people with dementia than people with MCI. Future research should address the methodological limitations and narrow scope of existing work. In the absence of strong evidence, clinicians and caregivers must use their judgement to appraise available technologies on a case-by-case basis.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Neal, D., van den Berg, F., Planting, C., Ettema, T., Dijkstra, K., Finnema, E., et al. (2021). Can Use of Digital Technologies by People with Dementia Improve Self-Management and Social Participation? A Systematic Review of Effect Studies. Journal of clinical medicine. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10040604

Vancouver

Neal D, van den Berg F, Planting C, Ettema T, Dijkstra K, Finnema E, et al. Can Use of Digital Technologies by People with Dementia Improve Self-Management and Social Participation? A Systematic Review of Effect Studies. Journal of clinical medicine. 2021. doi:10.3390/jcm10040604. PMID: 33562749.

BibTeX

@article{neal2021-33562749,
  author  = {Neal, D. and van den Berg, F. and Planting, C. and Ettema, T. and Dijkstra, K. and Finnema, E. and Dröes, R. M.},
  title   = {{Can Use of Digital Technologies by People with Dementia Improve Self-Management and Social Participation? A Systematic Review of Effect Studies}},
  journal = {Journal of clinical medicine},
  year    = {2021},
  doi     = {10.3390/jcm10040604},
  pmid    = {33562749},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10040604}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Of 1394 records identified, nine met the inclusion criteria: two were deemed to be of poor methodological quality, six of fair quality, and one of good quality.
Three clusters of technologies were identified: virtual reality, wearables, and software applications.
We identified weak evidence that digital technologies may provide less benefit to people with dementia than people with MCI.
Future research should address the methodological limitations and narrow scope of existing work.
In the absence of strong evidence, clinicians and caregivers must use their judgement to appraise available technologies on a case-by-case basis.

Why it matters

This systematic review found only weak evidence that digital technologies may improve self-management and social participation for people with dementia or mild cognitive impairment, and noted that digital technologies may provide less benefit to people with dementia than to those with mild cognitive impairment. It concerns support tools, not treating, curing, or preventing Alzheimer's disease.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Digital health →

Study details

Study designsystematic review
Evidence strengthHigh

How this study scored 61/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a systematic review of all the studies on the question. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported and studied in people because the record does not state it.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of clinical medicine)
Journal's citation record	2 / 4	Journal of Clinical Medicine: journal h-index 188 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design	12 / 12	A systematic review of all the studies on the question
Strength of evidence	5 / 5	Rated “high” in our summary
Peer-review validation	10 / 10	Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent	3 / 5	2021 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	0 / 4	Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported	0 / 3	No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people	0 / 3	Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Randomized / blinded	0 / 2	A review of other studies — randomization is not credited here
Times cited	4 / 7	Cited 66 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	3 / 5	9.4 citations a year over 7 year(s) since 2021
Impact for its field and year	2 / 6	Cited 2.4× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	1 / 6	Cited by 2 other studies in this library
Still being cited	2 / 4	Cited 32 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	3 / 4	Last-listed author Rose‐Marie Dröes: h-index 55 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	1 / 3	University of Groningen: institution h-index 1,383 (OpenAlex)
Multicenter collaboration	2 / 3	OpenAlex lists 9 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 33562749)
Free to read	2 / 2	Free to read
Total	61 / 100	—

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.

Later studies that cite this one

2 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references.

Related studies in Digital health tools

Also tagged “prevalence”

1,223 studies in the library carry the topic tag “prevalence”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,223 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Digital health tools

See all studies in Digital health tools →