12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      What is the next step of ICT development? The changes of ICT use in promoting elderly healthcare access: A systematic literature review

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The objective of this study was to undertake a comprehensive review of the evidence published, with a focus on understanding the experiences of the elderly in leveraging Information and Communication Technology (ICT) for their healthcare needs during the COVID-19 period. In compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, this review scrutinized all peer-reviewed articles in English sourced from PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science, targeting studies that focused exclusively on the elderly within the COVID-19 timeframe, incorporated ICT-based technology as intervention, and were associated with the assessment of the process of employing ICT for healthcare needs. The search strategy identified 1752 records, of which 34 studies met the inclusion criteria. The functionality of ICT was categorized, types of barriers were identified, and the subsequent changes that the elderly population underwent were synthesized and deliberated. This review offers valuable insights into the elderly's subjective experiences in utilizing ICT, which may offer guidance for future ICT development geared towards enhancing the well-being of the elderly. Future research should incorporate the perspectives of relevant healthcare providers in evaluating the effectiveness of ICT usage. Further studies are also needed on underserved elderly groups to provide a more holistic view.

          Related collections

          Most cited references80

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews

          Background Synthesis of multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in a systematic review can summarize the effects of individual outcomes and provide numerical answers about the effectiveness of interventions. Filtering of searches is time consuming, and no single method fulfills the principal requirements of speed with accuracy. Automation of systematic reviews is driven by a necessity to expedite the availability of current best evidence for policy and clinical decision-making. We developed Rayyan (http://rayyan.qcri.org), a free web and mobile app, that helps expedite the initial screening of abstracts and titles using a process of semi-automation while incorporating a high level of usability. For the beta testing phase, we used two published Cochrane reviews in which included studies had been selected manually. Their searches, with 1030 records and 273 records, were uploaded to Rayyan. Different features of Rayyan were tested using these two reviews. We also conducted a survey of Rayyan’s users and collected feedback through a built-in feature. Results Pilot testing of Rayyan focused on usability, accuracy against manual methods, and the added value of the prediction feature. The “taster” review (273 records) allowed a quick overview of Rayyan for early comments on usability. The second review (1030 records) required several iterations to identify the previously identified 11 trials. The “suggestions” and “hints,” based on the “prediction model,” appeared as testing progressed beyond five included studies. Post rollout user experiences and a reflexive response by the developers enabled real-time modifications and improvements. The survey respondents reported 40% average time savings when using Rayyan compared to others tools, with 34% of the respondents reporting more than 50% time savings. In addition, around 75% of the respondents mentioned that screening and labeling studies as well as collaborating on reviews to be the two most important features of Rayyan. As of November 2016, Rayyan users exceed 2000 from over 60 countries conducting hundreds of reviews totaling more than 1.6M citations. Feedback from users, obtained mostly through the app web site and a recent survey, has highlighted the ease in exploration of searches, the time saved, and simplicity in sharing and comparing include-exclude decisions. The strongest features of the app, identified and reported in user feedback, were its ability to help in screening and collaboration as well as the time savings it affords to users. Conclusions Rayyan is responsive and intuitive in use with significant potential to lighten the load of reviewers.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Book: not found

              Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions

              Healthcare providers, consumers, researchers and policy makers are inundated with unmanageable amounts of information, including evidence from healthcare research. It has become impossible for all to have the time and resources to find, appraise and interpret this evidence and incorporate it into healthcare decisions. Cochrane Reviews respond to this challenge by identifying, appraising and synthesizing research-based evidence and presenting it in a standardized format, published in The Cochrane Library (www.thecochranelibrary.com).<p><i>The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions</i> contains methodological guidance for the preparation and maintenance of Cochrane intervention reviews. Written in a clear and accessible format, it is the essential manual for all those preparing, maintaining and reading Cochrane reviews. Many of the principles and methods described here are appropriate for systematic reviews applied to other types of research and to systematic reviews of interventions undertaken by others. It is hoped therefore that this book will be invaluable to all those who want to understand the role of systematic reviews, critically appraise published reviews or perform reviews themselves.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Heliyon
                Heliyon
                Heliyon
                Elsevier
                2405-8440
                07 February 2024
                15 February 2024
                07 February 2024
                : 10
                : 3
                : e25197
                Affiliations
                [a ]The Department of Chinese and Bilingual Studies, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong
                [b ]Division of Public Policy, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong
                Author notes
                Article
                S2405-8440(24)01228-3 e25197
                10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e25197
                10873661
                38371988
                85e3d280-d511-472a-9dda-3da3518cf1a6
                © 2024 The Author(s)

                This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 28 September 2023
                : 22 January 2024
                : 23 January 2024
                Categories
                Research Article

                information and communication technology,elderly,healthcare,covid-19

                Comments

                Comment on this article