Exploring the Landscape of Standards and Guidelines in AgeTech Design and Development: Scoping Review and Thematic Analysis.

IF 5 Q1 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
JMIR Aging Pub Date : 2024-10-31 DOI:10.2196/58196
Shahabeddin Abhari, Josephine McMurray, Tanveer Randhawa, Gaya Bin Noon, Thokozani Hanjahanja-Phiri, Heather McNeil, Fiona Manning, Patricia Debergue, Jennifer Teague, Plinio Pelegrini Morita
{"title":"Exploring the Landscape of Standards and Guidelines in AgeTech Design and Development: Scoping Review and Thematic Analysis.","authors":"Shahabeddin Abhari, Josephine McMurray, Tanveer Randhawa, Gaya Bin Noon, Thokozani Hanjahanja-Phiri, Heather McNeil, Fiona Manning, Patricia Debergue, Jennifer Teague, Plinio Pelegrini Morita","doi":"10.2196/58196","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>AgeTech (technology for older people) offers digital solutions for older adults supporting aging in place, including digital health, assistive technology, Internet of Things, medical devices, robotics, wearables, and sensors. This study underscores the critical role of standards and guidelines in ensuring the safety and effectiveness of these technologies for the health of older adults. As the aging demographic expands, the focus on robust standards becomes vital, reflecting a collective commitment to improving the overall quality of life for older individuals through thoughtful and secure technology integration.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This scoping review aims to investigate the current state of standards and guidelines applied in AgeTech design and development as reported in academic literature. We explore the existing knowledge of these standards and guidelines and identify key gaps in the design and development of AgeTech guidelines and standards in scholarly publications.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The literature review adhered to the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. Searches were carried out across multiple databases, including Scopus, IEEE, PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO, CINAHL, Cochrane, and Google Scholar, using a search string incorporating concepts such as \"older people,\" \"technology,\" and \"standards or guidelines.\" Alternative terms, Boolean operators, and truncation were used for comprehensive coverage in each database. The synthesis of results and data analysis involved both quantitative and qualitative methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Initially, 736 documents were identified across various databases. After applying specific inclusion and exclusion criteria and a screening process, 58 documents were selected for full-text review. The findings highlight that the most frequently addressed aspect of AgeTech standards or guidelines is related to \"design and development,\" constituting 36% (21/58) of the literature; \"usability and user experience\" was the second most prevalent aspect, accounting for 19% (11/58) of the documents. In contrast, \"privacy and security\" (1/58, 2%) and \"data quality\" (1/58, 2%) were the least addressed aspects. Similarly, \"ethics,\" \"integration and interoperability,\" \"accessibility,\" and \"acceptance or adoption\" each accounted for 3% (2/58) of the documents. In addition, a thematic analysis identified qualitative themes that warrant further exploration of variables.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study investigated the available knowledge regarding standards and guidelines in AgeTech design and development to evaluate their current status in academic literature. The substantial focus on assistive technologies and ambient assisted living technologies confirmed their vital role in AgeTech. The findings provide valuable insights for interested parties and point to prioritized areas for further development and research in the AgeTech domain.</p>","PeriodicalId":36245,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Aging","volume":"7 ","pages":"e58196"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11565081/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Aging","FirstCategoryId":"88","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/58196","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: AgeTech (technology for older people) offers digital solutions for older adults supporting aging in place, including digital health, assistive technology, Internet of Things, medical devices, robotics, wearables, and sensors. This study underscores the critical role of standards and guidelines in ensuring the safety and effectiveness of these technologies for the health of older adults. As the aging demographic expands, the focus on robust standards becomes vital, reflecting a collective commitment to improving the overall quality of life for older individuals through thoughtful and secure technology integration.

Objective: This scoping review aims to investigate the current state of standards and guidelines applied in AgeTech design and development as reported in academic literature. We explore the existing knowledge of these standards and guidelines and identify key gaps in the design and development of AgeTech guidelines and standards in scholarly publications.

Methods: The literature review adhered to the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. Searches were carried out across multiple databases, including Scopus, IEEE, PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO, CINAHL, Cochrane, and Google Scholar, using a search string incorporating concepts such as "older people," "technology," and "standards or guidelines." Alternative terms, Boolean operators, and truncation were used for comprehensive coverage in each database. The synthesis of results and data analysis involved both quantitative and qualitative methods.

Results: Initially, 736 documents were identified across various databases. After applying specific inclusion and exclusion criteria and a screening process, 58 documents were selected for full-text review. The findings highlight that the most frequently addressed aspect of AgeTech standards or guidelines is related to "design and development," constituting 36% (21/58) of the literature; "usability and user experience" was the second most prevalent aspect, accounting for 19% (11/58) of the documents. In contrast, "privacy and security" (1/58, 2%) and "data quality" (1/58, 2%) were the least addressed aspects. Similarly, "ethics," "integration and interoperability," "accessibility," and "acceptance or adoption" each accounted for 3% (2/58) of the documents. In addition, a thematic analysis identified qualitative themes that warrant further exploration of variables.

Conclusions: This study investigated the available knowledge regarding standards and guidelines in AgeTech design and development to evaluate their current status in academic literature. The substantial focus on assistive technologies and ambient assisted living technologies confirmed their vital role in AgeTech. The findings provide valuable insights for interested parties and point to prioritized areas for further development and research in the AgeTech domain.

探索 AgeTech 设计和开发中的标准和指南:范围审查和专题分析。
背景:AgeTech (老年人科技)为老年人提供支持居家养老的数字解决方案,包括数字健康、辅助技术、物联网、医疗设备、机器人、可穿戴设备和传感器。这项研究强调了标准和指南在确保这些技术对老年人健康的安全性和有效性方面的关键作用。随着老龄化人口的增加,对健全标准的关注变得至关重要,这反映了通过周到、安全的技术整合提高老年人整体生活质量的集体承诺:本综述旨在调查学术文献中报道的适用于 AgeTech 设计和开发的标准和指南的现状。我们探讨了这些标准和指南的现有知识,并找出了学术出版物中 AgeTech 指南和标准设计与开发方面的主要差距:文献综述遵循了 PRISMA-ScR(系统综述和 Meta 分析的首选报告项目扩展范围综述)指南。使用包含 "老年人"、"技术 "和 "标准或指南 "等概念的搜索字符串,在 Scopus、IEEE、PubMed、Web of Science、EBSCO、CINAHL、Cochrane 和 Google Scholar 等多个数据库中进行了搜索。为了全面覆盖每个数据库,还使用了替代词、布尔运算符和截断法。结果综合和数据分析涉及定量和定性方法:最初,各数据库共识别出 736 篇文献。在应用了特定的纳入和排除标准以及筛选过程后,选择了 58 篇文献进行全文审阅。研究结果表明,AgeTech 标准或指南最常涉及的方面与 "设计和开发 "有关,占文献的 36%(21/58);"可用性和用户体验 "是第二大方面,占文献的 19%(11/58)。相比之下,"隐私与安全"(1/58,2%)和 "数据质量"(1/58,2%)是涉及最少的方面。同样,"伦理"、"集成和互操作性"、"可访问性 "和 "接受或采用 "各占文件的 3%(2/58)。此外,专题分析还发现了一些值得进一步探讨的定性主题:本研究调查了有关 AgeTech 设计和开发标准和指南的现有知识,以评估其在学术文献中的现状。对辅助技术和环境辅助生活技术的大量关注证实了它们在 AgeTech 中的重要作用。研究结果为有关各方提供了宝贵的见解,并指出了 AgeTech 领域进一步发展和研究的优先领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JMIR Aging
JMIR Aging Social Sciences-Health (social science)
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
4.10%
发文量
71
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信