Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Smartphone use by people with dementia: An exploratory survey
Amber Sacre, Conor Wall, Alan Godfrey, Victoria Hetherington, Andrew Byrne, Robert Barber. Maturitas, 2025-10-13
Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology
There were 719 respondents (276 people with dementia, 443 carers). Amongst smartphone owners (47.7 %), only 39.4 % used these devices for dementia management: 89 people with dementia and 19 carers (reporting for people with dementia), mainly for memory support. Overall, 52.8 % used smartphones for safety and independence, primarily specifically for communication (128 people with dementia, 44 carers). Key barriers included setup difficulty (people with dementia) and complexity concerns (non-owners), with moderate concerns over fraud and theft. Smartphones are underused in dementia care. Improving usability, nuanced smartphone functionality (and app co-design), and enhancing accessibility are essential to reducing digital exclusion and improving care engagement.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Sacre, A., Wall, C., Godfrey, A., Hetherington, V., Byrne, A., & Barber, R. (2025). Smartphone use by people with dementia: An exploratory survey. Maturitas. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2025.108751
Vancouver
Sacre A, Wall C, Godfrey A, Hetherington V, Byrne A, Barber R. Smartphone use by people with dementia: An exploratory survey. Maturitas. 2025. doi:10.1016/j.maturitas.2025.108751. PMID: 41110277.
BibTeX
@article{sacre2025-41110277,
author = {Sacre, Amber and Wall, Conor and Godfrey, Alan and Hetherington, Victoria and Byrne, Andrew and Barber, Robert},
title = {{Smartphone use by people with dementia: An exploratory survey}},
journal = {Maturitas},
year = {2025},
doi = {10.1016/j.maturitas.2025.108751},
pmid = {41110277},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2025.108751}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- There were 719 respondents (276 people with dementia, 443 carers).
- Amongst smartphone owners (47.7 %), only 39.4 % used these devices for dementia management: 89 people with dementia and 19 carers (reporting for people with dementia), mainly for memory support.
- Overall, 52.8 % used smartphones for safety and independence, primarily specifically for communication (128 people with dementia, 44 carers).
- Key barriers included setup difficulty (people with dementia) and complexity concerns (non-owners), with moderate concerns over fraud and theft.
- Smartphones are underused in dementia care.
Study details
- Study designcross-sectional
- Participants276
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 59/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a snapshot of people at one point in time. Scored zero for effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 33 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 59 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Maturitas) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 4 / 12 | A snapshot of people at one point in time |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 4 / 5 | 2025 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 276 participants |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 41110277) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 33 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 33 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 59 out of 100. |
| Total | 59 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related studies in Cognitive tests and assessment
Also tagged “computerized”
239 studies in the library carry the topic tag “computerized”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 239 tagged studies.