Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Usability and acceptability of wearable technology in the early detection of dementia
Sarah Wilson, Ríona Mc Ardle, Clare Tolley, Sarah Slight. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2022-12
Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology
Sixteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with nine participants, at two-time points. Four participants had mild cognitive impairment, two had frontotemporal dementia, one had Alzheimer's and two were carers. We identified three key themes, which centred around usability, acceptability and inequity. Participants expressed the wearable devices were comfortable but individuals with physical disabilities or cognitive impairments struggled to use some devices. Participants valued the feedback the devices provided such as information on sleep and heart rate, although some information was not fully understood. Participants also shared their concerns around detecting preclinical dementia and the increased anxiety around the consequences of this such as "being put in a home". Various inequities of the toolkit were uncovered such as digital exclusion relating to a lack of access to strong WiFi connection, compatible smartphones and poor digital literacy. These results are informative for the further development of user-friendly digital tools for the early detection of dementia. Further work is required to ensure a digital toolkit is inclusive and provides information that can be understood by the user.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Wilson, S., Ardle, R. M., Tolley, C., & Slight, S. (2022). Usability and acceptability of wearable technology in the early detection of dementia. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.059820
Vancouver
Wilson S, Ardle RM, Tolley C, Slight S. Usability and acceptability of wearable technology in the early detection of dementia. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. 2022. doi:10.1002/alz.059820. PMID: 36537475.
BibTeX
@article{wilson2022-36537475,
author = {Wilson, Sarah and Ardle, Ríona Mc and Tolley, Clare and Slight, Sarah},
title = {{Usability and acceptability of wearable technology in the early detection of dementia}},
journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association},
year = {2022},
doi = {10.1002/alz.059820},
pmid = {36537475},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.059820}
}
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
- Sixteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with nine participants, at two-time points.
- Four participants had mild cognitive impairment, two had frontotemporal dementia, one had Alzheimer's and two were carers.
- We identified three key themes, which centred around usability, acceptability and inequity.
- Participants expressed the wearable devices were comfortable but individuals with physical disabilities or cognitive impairments struggled to use some devices.
- Participants valued the feedback the devices provided such as information on sleep and heart rate, although some information was not fully understood.
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 45/100
Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people 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 25 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 45 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| 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 | 3 / 5 | 2022 — 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) |
| 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 36537475) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 25 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 25 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 45 out of 100. |
| Total | 45 / 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.