| Title |
Views of Caregivers on the Ethics of Assistive Technology Used for Home Surveillance of People Living with Dementia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Neuroethics, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12152-017-9305-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Maurice Mulvenna, Anton Hutton, Vivien Coates, Suzanne Martin, Stephen Todd, Raymond Bond, Anne Moorhead |
| Abstract |
This paper examines the ethics of using assistive technology such as video surveillance in the homes of people living with dementia. Ideation and concept elaboration around the introduction of a camera-based surveillance service in the homes of people with dementia, typically living alone, is explored. The paper reviews relevant literature on surveillance of people living with dementia, and summarises the findings from ideation and concept elaboration workshops, designed to capture the views of those involved in the care of people living with dementia at home. The research question relates to the ethical considerations of using assistive technologies that include video surveillance in the homes of people living with dementia, and the implications for a person living with dementia whenever video surveillance is used in their home and access to the camera is given to the person's family. The review of related work indicated that such video surveillance may result in loss of autonomy or freedom for the person with dementia. The workshops reflected the findings from the related work, and revealed useful information to inform the service design, in particular in fine-tuning the service to find the best relationship between privacy and usefulness. Those who took part in the workshops supported the concept of the use of camera in the homes of people living with dementia, with some significant caveats around privacy. The research carried out in this work is small in scale but points towards an acceptance by many caregivers of people living with dementia of surveillance technologies. This paper indicates that those who care for people living with dementia at home are willing to make use of camera technology and therefore the value of this work is to help shed light on the direction for future research. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 40% |
| Ireland | 2 | 20% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 70% |
| Scientists | 3 | 30% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 176 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 176 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 31 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 24 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 22 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 8% |
| Researcher | 13 | 7% |
| Other | 27 | 15% |
| Unknown | 45 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 21 | 12% |
| Computer Science | 21 | 12% |
| Engineering | 16 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 14 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 7% |
| Other | 42 | 24% |
| Unknown | 50 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 July 2022.
All research outputs
#1,708,087
of 24,180,797 outputs
Outputs from Neuroethics
#71
of 425 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,783
of 426,409 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuroethics
#4
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,180,797 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 425 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 426,409 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.