Cited by 62Technology Use by Older AdultsUsability and User Interface DesignAssistive Technology in Communication and Mobility

Pervasive assistive technology for people with dementia: a UCD case

Open access
Thorpe, Julia Rosemary, R⊘nn‐Andersen, Kristoffer V.H., Bień, Paulina, Özkil, Ali Gürcan, Forchhammer, Birgitte Hysse, Maier, Anja M.·2016·Healthcare Technology Letters

Abstract

Smart mobile and wearable technology offers exciting opportunities to support people with dementia (PwD). Its ubiquity and popularity could even benefit user adoption – a great challenge for assistive technology (AT) for PwD that calls for user‐centred design (UCD) methods. This study describes a user‐centred approach to developing and testing AT based on off‐the‐shelf pervasive technologies. A prototype is created by combining a smartphone, smartwatch and various applications to offer six support features. This is tested among five end‐users (PwD) and their caregivers. Controlled usability testing was followed by field testing in a real‐world context. Data is gathered from video recordings, interaction logs, system usability scale questionnaires, logbooks, application usage logs and interviews structured on the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology model. The data is analysed to evaluate usability, usefulness and user acceptance. Results show some promise for user adoption, but highlight challenges to be overcome, emphasising personalisation and familiarity as key considerations. The complete findings regarding usability issues, usefulness of support features and four identified adoption profiles are used to provide a set of recommendations for practitioners and further research. These contribute toward UCD practices for improved smart, pervasive AT for dementia.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1049/htl.2016.0057

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 34 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [16]Benyon D.: ‘ Designing interactive systems: a comprehensive guide to HCI and interaction design’ (Addison Wesley, Harlow, 2010, 2nd edn.)
  2. [21]Viswanath Venkatesh F.D.D. Morris M.G. Davis G.B.: ‘ User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view’, MIS Q., 2003, 27, (3), pp. 425– 478

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Thorpe, J. R., R⊘nn‐Andersen, K. V. H., Bień, P., Özkil, A. G., Forchhammer, B. H., & Maier, A. M.
Affiliations
  • Technical University of Denmark (DK)
  • Glostrup Hospital (DK)
Corresponding author
Thorpe, Julia Rosemary
Venue
Healthcare Technology Letters
Published
2016-11-02
Volume
3
Issue
4
Pages
297-302
ISSN
2053-3713 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2547776275
Cited by
62
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4
FWCI
18.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Healthcare Technology Letters (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Strathprints: The University of Strathclyde institutional repository (University of Strathclyde) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Technical University of Denmark, DTU Orbit (Technical University of Denmark, DTU) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Rigshospitalet
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
Keywords
dementia, assistive technology, user-centered design, pervasive technologies, wearable devices, smartphones, smartwatches, caregiver support, user adoption, technology acceptance, personalization, usability, field testing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review