Experienced usability of assistive technology for cognitive support with respect to user goals
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Studies have shown that Assistive Technology (AT) for cognitive support can support users in everyday activities. However, whether the AT actually supports the user to achieve their individual goals must further be examined. OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to examine the experienced usability of features in AT for cognitive support for users with cognitive impairment. METHODS: A content analysis was applied on data from interviews and field notes collected during two six-month interventions in which persons with cognitive impairment tested AT for cognitive support. RESULTS: Features, included in the AT support that enhanced the user's sense of control, were identified as promotional for the achievement of user goals, and some features, such as reminders, were more sensitive to the specific user's perceptions and motives. Also, features related to how the AT was maintained and communicated with other technology were very influential. CONCLUSIONS: The results show that easily maintained AT that fits in to the context of use increases the user's sense of control of the AT and thereby promotes the goal achievement and usability of the AT. Further, the usability of the AT is very influenced by contextual factors such as the ordinary mobile network, the Internet, and the operators.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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 3 (independent living) comprised six studies that explored possibly improved occupational performance with the help of technology.
“Domain 3 presents six studies that explored possibly improved occupational performance with the help of technology.30,31,42–45”
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 [43]
Cavallo et al (2015), Leuty et al (2013), and Lindqvist et al (2015) used the same definition as this review regarding usability.
“Cavallo et al (2015),19 Leuty et al (2013),47 and Lindqvist et al (2015)43 used the same definition as this review regarding usability.”
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 [43]
Many of the studies explicitly aimed to evaluate the usability of the technologies that were explored.
“Many of the studies explicitly aimed to evaluate the usability of the technologies that were explored.19,28,38,40,43,47,49,51”
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 [43]
Lindqvist (2015) operationalized the concept of usability to include three factors: the user's desired goals, the hindering task according to the user, and the chosen assistive technology.
“Lindqvist (2015, p. 138) operationalized the concept of usability to include three factors: the user’s desired goals, the hindering task according to the user, and the chosen assistive technology.43”
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 [43]
Some studies underlined the necessity of tailoring the technology to the user's needs and preferences.
“Some studies underlined the necessity of tailoring the technology to the user’s needs and preferences.33,43,48”
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 [43]
Two studies used workshops as the method for user engagement, and six studies used observation as method.
“Two studies used workshops as the method for user engagement,29,41 and six studies used observation as method.28,40,43–45,53”
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 [43]
Several authors referred to the International Organization for Standardization's definition of usability.
“Several authors referred to the International Organization for Standardization’s definition of usability.19,43,47”
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 [43]
Lindqvist et al (2015) stated that the person with MCI/D's perception of the extent to which their own goals have been achieved must be included to assess the usability of a product or solution.
“Lindqvist et al (2015) stated that the person with MCI/D’s perception of the extent to which their own goals have been achieved must be included to assess the usability of a product or solution.43”
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 [43]
Some of the studies highlighted that the technology must be tailored to the user in order to be useful and usable.
“Some of the studies highlighted that the technology must be tailored to the user in order to be useful and usable.19,43,45,52”
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 [43]
Each user's customization to the technology always depends upon the self-perception of his or her own goals.
“Further, each user’s customization to the technology always depends upon the self-perception of his or her own goals.43”
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 [43]
In eleven studies, the IAT was accepted but not used in the following implementation period, resulting in poor adherence.
“In eleven studies, the IAT was accepted but not used in the following implementation period, therefore resulting in poor adherence [24, 29, 34–38, 41, 44, 46, 47].”
From Acceptance and use of innovative assistive technologies among people with cognitive impairment and their caregivers: a systematic review (2019) · cites this paper as [36]
Some studies indicated the need for transparent and easy-to-understand information feedback for increasing the perceived efficiency of the technology and the need for a personalized fit between the technology and preferences of the participants.
“Some studies [46, 47] also indicated the need for transparent and easy-to-understand information feedback for increasing the perceived efficiency of the technology and the need for a personalized fit between the technology and preferences of the participants [36].”
From Acceptance and use of innovative assistive technologies among people with cognitive impairment and their caregivers: a systematic review (2019) · cites this paper as [36]
Cites
Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E., & McHugh, P. R. (1975) · Journal of Psychiatric Research · doi:10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6 · Cited by 88,282 · see citing works
Graneheim, U. H., & Lundman, B. (2004) · Nurse Education Today · doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001 · Cited by 20,772 · see citing works
Model of Human Occupation: Theory and Application
Kielhofner, G. (2002) · Cited by 1,568 · see citing works
Human-centered design considered harmful
Norman, D. A. (2005) · interactions · doi:10.1145/1070960.1070976 · Cited by 487 · see citing works
Technology Studies to Meet the Needs of People With Dementia and Their Caregivers
Topo, P. (2009) · Journal of Applied Gerontology · doi:10.1177/0733464808324019 · Cited by 332 · see citing works
Non-use of provided assistive technology devices, a literature overview
Wessels, R. D., Dijcks, B., Soede, M., Gelderblom, G. J., & de Witte, L. (2004) · Technology and Disability · doi:10.3233/tad-2003-15404 · Cited by 216 · see citing works
Pot, A. M., Willemse, B. M., & Horjus, S. (2012) · Aging & Mental Health · doi:10.1080/13607863.2011.596810 · Cited by 133 · see citing works
Mobile phones as a new memory aid: a preliminary investigation using case studies
Tk, W., & troy, J. (2001) · Brain Injury · doi:10.1080/026990501750111256 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
Oriani, M., Moniz-Cook, E. D., Binetti, G. G., Zanieri, G., Frisoni, G. B., Geroldi, C., Vreese, L. P. D., & Zanetti, O. O. (2003) · Aging & Mental Health · doi:10.1080/1360786021000045863 · Cited by 96 · see citing works
Compliance with Prescribed Adaptive Equipment: A Literature Review
Wielandt, T., & Strong, J. (2000) · British Journal of Occupational Therapy · doi:10.1177/030802260006300204 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
Lindqvist, E., Nygård, L., & Borell, L. (2013) · Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy · doi:10.3109/11038128.2013.766761 · Cited by 71 · see citing works
Self-citationFrom people-centered to person-centered services, and back again
Scherer, M. J. (2013) · Disability and Rehabilitation Assistive Technology · doi:10.3109/17483107.2013.870239 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
Experience-based guidelines for the implementation of telemedicine services
Brebner, J. A., Brebner, E. M., & Ruddick-Bracken, H. (2005) · Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare · doi:10.1258/1357633054461778 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
The Useworthiness of Robots for People with Physical Disabilities
Eftring, H. (1999) · Lund University Publications (Lund University) · Cited by 47 · see citing works
Boman, I.-L., Bartfai, A., Borell, L., Tham, K., & Hemmingsson, H. (2010) · Disability and Rehabilitation Assistive Technology · doi:10.3109/17483100903131777 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Self-citationTopo, P., Jylhä, M. K., & Laine, J. (2002) · Technology and Disability · doi:10.3233/tad-2002-14102 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
The promise and challenge of providing assistive technology to older people
Lansley, P. R. (2001) · Age and Ageing · doi:10.1093/ageing/30.6.439 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Computer-based assistive technology and changes in daily living after stroke
Lindqvist, E., & Borell, L. (2011) · Disability and Rehabilitation Assistive Technology · doi:10.3109/17483107.2011.638036 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Self-citationDesign and Management Features of Everyday Technology That Challenge Older Adults
Patomella, A., Kottorp, A., & Nygård, L. (2013) · British Journal of Occupational Therapy · doi:10.4276/030802213x13782044946229 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
Hersh, M. A. (2010) · ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Reminders that Make Sense: Designing Multimodal Notifications for the Home
Lennon, M., & Brewster, S. A. (2011) · International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare · doi:10.4108/icst.pervasivehealth.2011.246032 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Williams, G., King, P., & Doughty, K. (2011) · Journal of Assistive Technologies · doi:10.1108/17549451111173505 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
THE BUILDING INFRASTRUCTURE AND HOME CARE
Lundberg, S. (2007) · KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Holthe, T., Halvorsrud, L., Karterud, D., Hoel, K.-A., & Lund, A. (2018) · Clinical Interventions in Aging · doi:10.2147/cia.s154717 · Cited by 199 · see citing works
“19,28,38,40,43,47,49,51 Cavallo et al (2015) found that perceived usability could improve QoL for people with MCI/D and their FCs. 19 Cav-allo et al (2015), 19 Leuty et al (2013), 47 and Lindqvist et al (2015) 43 used the same definition as this review regarding usability.”
InfluentialThordardottir, B., Malmgren Fänge, A., Lethin, C., Rodriguez Gatta, D., & Chiatti, C. (2019) · BioMed Research International · doi:10.1155/2019/9196729 · Cited by 169 · see citing works
Boyle, L. D., Husebo, B. S., & Vislapuu, M. (2022) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-022-08968-2 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
Pervasive assistive technology for people with dementia: a UCD case
Thorpe, J. R., R⊘nn‐Andersen, K. V. H., Bień, P., Özkil, A. G., Forchhammer, B. H., & Maier, A. M. (2016) · Healthcare Technology Letters · doi:10.1049/htl.2016.0057 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
“impaired users; however, these tend to focus on specialised equipment developed for the impaired [4].”
BackgroundHolthe, T., Jentoft, R., Arntzen, C., & Thorsen, K. (2017) · Disability and Rehabilitation Assistive Technology · doi:10.1080/17483107.2017.1373151 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
Leopold, A., Lourie, A., Petras, H., & Elias, E. (2015) · Neurorehabilitation · doi:10.3233/nre-151267 · Cited by 55 · see citing works
Sensor technology more than a support
Olsson, A., Persson, A., Bartfai, A., & Boman, I.-L. (2017) · Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy · doi:10.1080/11038128.2017.1293155 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Nicholas, D. B., Orjasaeter, J., & Zwaigenbaum, L. (2019) · Review Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders · doi:10.1007/s40489-019-00164-z · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Technology Usability for People Living With Dementia: Concept Analysis
Chien, S., Zaslavsky, O., & Berridge, C. W. (2024) · JMIR Aging · doi:10.2196/51987 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Zander, V., Johansson‐Pajala, R., & Gustafsson, C. (2019) · Disability and Rehabilitation Assistive Technology · doi:10.1080/17483107.2019.1574919 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Boman, I.-L., Persson, A., & Bartfai, A. (2016) · BMC Geriatrics · doi:10.1186/s12877-016-0238-x · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Malinowsky, C. W., Kottorp, A., Patomella, A., Rosenberg, L., & Nygård, L. (2015) · Technology and Disability · doi:10.3233/tad-150431 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Bergström, A., Borell, L., Meijer, S., & Guidetti, S. G. E. (2019) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025870 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Self-citationMalinowsky, C. W., Fallahpour, M., Larsson-Lund, M., Nygård, L., & Kottorp, A. (2017) · Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy · doi:10.1080/11038128.2017.1298665 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Kottorp, A., Malinowsky, C. W., Larsson-Lund, M., & Nygård, L. (2018) · Disability and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1080/09638288.2018.1472816 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Holthe, T., & Wulff-Jacobsen, I. (2016) · Family Medicine & Primary Care Review · doi:10.5114/fmpcr.2016.63710 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Dsouza, S. A., Ramachandran, M., Bangera, K., & Acharya, V. (2022) · Disability and Rehabilitation Assistive Technology · doi:10.1080/17483107.2022.2138995 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Bier, N., Sablier, J., Briand, C., Pinard, S., Rialle, V., Giroux, S., Pigot, H., Quillion‐Dupré, L., Bauchet, J., Monfort, E., et al. (2018) · Neuropsychological Rehabilitation · doi:10.1080/09602011.2018.1437677 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Nicholas, D. B., Orjasaeter, J., & Zwaigenbaum, L. (2019) · Review Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders · doi:10.1007/s40489-019-00168-9 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Is RRI a new R&I logic? A reflection from an integrated RRI project
Forsberg, E., Thorstensen, E., Casagrande, F. D., Holthe, T., Halvorsrud, L., Lund, A. D., & Zouganeli, E. (2020) · Journal of Responsible Technology · doi:10.1016/j.jrt.2020.100007 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Tsertsidis, A., Kolkowska, E., & Rapado, I. (2021) · Disability and Rehabilitation Assistive Technology · doi:10.1080/17483107.2021.2008529 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Hammink, J. H. W., Moor, J. A., & Mohammadi, M. (. (2021) · Disability and Rehabilitation Assistive Technology · doi:10.1080/17483107.2021.1994032 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Puthran, R., Janeslätt, G. K., Acharya, V., Ramachandran, M., & Dsouza, S. A. (2023) · Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy · doi:10.1080/11038128.2023.2211314 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Lancioni, G. E., O’Reilly, M. F., Sigafoos, J., D’Amico, F., Pinto, K., Vanna, F. D., & Scordamaglia, A. (2016) · Advances in Neurodevelopmental Disorders · doi:10.1007/s41252-016-0002-4 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Epistemic Complementarity: Steps to a Second Wave Extended Epistemology
Andrada, G. (2021) · Studies in brain and mind · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-72644-7_12 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Lipson‐Smith, R., Monzaviyan, S., Aghaei, M., Cannings, M. J., Nicholson, R., Brookman, R., & Harris, C. B. (2025) · Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies · doi:10.1155/hbe2/3850397 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Assistive Technology for People with Dementia: Ethical Considerations
Kim, H. S. (2017) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-42890-1_11 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Velferdsteknologi som kommunal tjeneste til personer med kognitiv svikt/demens
Holthe, T., Lund, A. D., & Landmark, B. (2017) · Tidsskrift for omsorgsforskning · doi:10.18261/issn.2387-5984-2017-03-09
Boyle, L. D., Husebo, B. S., & Vislapuu, M. (2024) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.26556923
Boyle, L. D., Husebo, B. S., & Vislapuu, M. (2024) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.26556920
Boyle, L. D., Husebo, B. S., & Vislapuu, M. (2024) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.26556926
Dsouza, S. A., Bangera, K., Acharya, V., & Guddattu, V. (2026) · BMC Geriatrics · doi:10.1186/s12877-026-06985-y
Kawasaki, M., Hirai, M., Itoh, K., & Suzurikawa, J. (2026) · International Journal of Rehabilitation Research · doi:10.1097/mrr.0000000000000696
Nir, T., Spencer, K., Burns, M. I., & Strand, E. (2026) · Assistive Technology · doi:10.1080/10400435.2026.2698715
- Authors
- Lindqvist, E., Larsson, T. J., & Borell, L.
- Affiliations
- Karolinska Institutet (SE)
- KTH Royal Institute of Technology (SE)
- ORCID
- Borell, Lena
- Venue
- NeuroRehabilitation
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2015-02-25
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 135-149
- ISSN
- 1053-8135 (ISSN-L)
- 1878-6448
- OpenAlex
- W1556445639
- Cited by
- 35
- References
- 23
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2
- FWCI
- 14.85
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Neurorehabilitation (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
- Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Keywords
- assistive technology, cognitive support, cognitive impairment, usability, user goals, perceived control, reminders, technology maintenance, contextual factors, everyday activities
- MeSH terms
- Stroke Rehabilitation, Adult, Alzheimer Disease, Cognition Disorders, Goals, Humans, Self-Help Devices, Stroke
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
