Terms of Engagement: Understanding the Motivations, Preferences, and Attitudes of Older Adults Toward Mobile Cognitive Assessment and Training
Gerontologist, ISSN: 1758-5341, Vol: 64, Issue: 2
2024
- 3Citations
- 29Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations3
- Citation Indexes3
- CrossRef1
- Captures29
- Readers29
- 29
Article Description
Background and Objectives: The future of cognitive assessment is likely to involve mobile applications for smartphones and tablets; cognitive training is also often delivered in these formats. Unfortunately, low adherence to these programs can hinder efforts at the early detection of cognitive decline and interfere with examining cognitive training efficacy in clinical trials. We explored factors that increase adherence to these programs among older adults. Research Design and Methods: Focus groups were conducted with older adults (N = 21) and a younger adult comparison group (N = 21). Data were processed using reflexive thematic analysis with an inductive, bottom-up approach. Results: Three primary themes related to adherence were developed from the focus group data. Switches of engagement reflects factors that must be present; without them, engagement is unlikely. Dials of engagement reflects a cost-benefit analysis that users undergo, the outcome of which determines whether a person will be more or less likely to engage. Bracers of engagement reflects factors that nudge users toward engagement by minimizing barriers associated with the other themes. Older adults in general were more sensitive to opportunity costs, preferred more cooperative interactions, and were more likely to mention technology barriers. Discussion and Implications: Our results are important for informing the design of mobile cognitive assessment and training apps for older adults. These themes provide guidance about ways apps could be modified to increase engagement and adherence, which in turn can more effectively facilitate the early detection of cognitive impairment and the evaluation of cognitive training efficacy.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85181947366&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnad048; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37097773; https://academic.oup.com/gerontologist/article/doi/10.1093/geront/gnad048/7142548; https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnad048; https://academic.oup.com/gerontologist/article/64/2/gnad048/7142548
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know