Personalized Technology to Support Older Adults With and Without Cognitive Impairment Living at Home
Open accessAbstract
Although persons with dementia (PWD) and their family caregivers need in-home support for common neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS), few if any assistive technologies are available to help manage NPS. This implementation study tested the feasibility and adoption of a touch screen technology, the Companion, which delivers psychosocial, nondrug interventions to PWD in their home to address individual NPS and needs. Interventions were personalized and delivered in home for a minimum of 3 weeks. Postintervention measures indicated the technology was easy to use, significantly facilitated meaningful and positive engagement, and simplified caregivers’ daily lives. Although intervention goals were met, caregivers had high expectations of their loved one’s ability to regain independence. Care recipients used the system independently but were limited by cognitive and physical impairments. We conclude the Companion can help manage NPS and offer caregiver respite at home. These data provide important guidance for design and deployment of care technology for the home.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
Domain 4 (entertainment and social communication) comprised seven studies on technologies for entertainment and leisure, including four papers on touch-screen tablets (iPads), one on a camera to document personal events, and one on a digital board with a touch screen for cognitive stimulation and joy.
“Domain 4 presents seven studies on technologies for entertainment and leisure. Four papers explored the use of touch-screen tablets (iPads).21,46–48 One study explored using a camera to document personal events with the intention of reminding the person of (jogging the memory for) recent events,49 and one study used a digital board with a touch screen for both cognitive stimulation and joy.50”
From Usability and acceptability of technology for community-dwelling older adults with mild cognitive impairment and dementia: a systematic literature review (2018) · cites this paper as [46]
The Introduction (page unavailable) describes a touch-screen Companion that presents personalized images, music, and messages; the Discussion reports that participants enjoyed its shows as a pastime. This supports including the study among technologies used for leisure, but the paper identifies its device as a touch-screen computer, not an iPad or tablet. The counts of studies and the camera and digital-board examples are not attributed to this source by the citing sentence. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredKerssens et al (2015) found that the majority of seven persons with MCI/D enjoyed the touch-screen shows, which brought back memories and helped with relaxation and joy.
“Kerssens et al (2015) found that the majority of seven persons with MCI/D enjoyed the touch-screen shows, which brought back memories and helped with relaxation and joy.”
From Usability and acceptability of technology for community-dwelling older adults with mild cognitive impairment and dementia: a systematic literature review (2018) · cites this paper as [46]
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredSix studies tested computer tablets and iPads with people with MCI/D.
“Six studies tested computer tablets and iPads with people with MCI/D.21,46–48,50,51”
From Usability and acceptability of technology for community-dwelling older adults with mild cognitive impairment and dementia: a systematic literature review (2018) · cites this paper as [46]
The Introduction describes this study as testing the Companion, a touch-screen computer, in seven households; the Results report participants with MCI or dementia. Our copy does not identify the Companion as a tablet or iPad, and this single paper cannot establish the citing sentence’s count of six studies. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredTwo of the six persons with MCI/D did not use the touch screen independently.
“However, two of the six persons with MCI/D did not use the touch screen independently.46”
From Usability and acceptability of technology for community-dwelling older adults with mild cognitive impairment and dementia: a systematic literature review (2018) · cites this paper as [46]
The purposes of tablet/iPad studies were mainly to provide meaningful engagement and cognitive stimulation from photos, music, and games.
“The purposes were mainly to provide meaningful engagement21 and cognitive stimulation from photos, music, and games.46,48,50”
From Usability and acceptability of technology for community-dwelling older adults with mild cognitive impairment and dementia: a systematic literature review (2018) · cites this paper as [46]
Twelve studies presented results on IAT that were both accepted and used by the participants.
“Twelve studies presented results on IAT that were both accepted and used by the participants [19–21, 23, 27, 30–33, 42, 43, 45].”
From Acceptance and use of innovative assistive technologies among people with cognitive impairment and their caregivers: a systematic review (2019) · cites this paper as [30]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 53 · Cited by 91
- Authors
- Kerssens, C., Kumar, R., Adams, A. E., Knott, C. C., Matalenas, L., Sanford, J. A., & Rogers, W. A.
- Affiliations
- Research & Innovation SimpleC, LLC, Atlanta, GA, USA
- Georgia Institute of Technology (US)
- Aptima (United States) (US)
- Corresponding author
- Kerssens, Chantal
- ORCID
- Rogers, Wendy A.
- Venue
- American Journal of Alzheimer's Disease & Other Dementias®
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2015-01-22
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 85-97
- ISSN
- 0888-4897 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-3175
- 1938-2731
- PMC
- PMC4819239
- OpenAlex
- W2167727613
- Cited by
- 91
- References
- 53
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 4
- FWCI
- 8.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- American Journal of Alzheimer s Disease & Other Dementias® (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Small Business Innovation Research
- National Institutes of Health (5r44ag042206-03)
- National Institute on Aging (R44 AG042206, 1R44AG042206-01)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
- Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
- Keywords
- dementia, neuropsychiatric symptoms, assistive technology, home care, respite care, family caregivers, personalized interventions, touch screen technology, caregiver burden, older adults, technology adoption, feasibility
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cognition Disorders, Feasibility Studies, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Self-Help Devices, Independent Living, Precision Medicine
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
