| Title |
Possibilities of ICT-supported services in the clinical management of older adults
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Aging Clinical and Experimental Research, February 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40520-016-0711-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Miriam Vollenbroek-Hutten, Stephanie Jansen-Kosterink, Monique Tabak, Luca Carlo Feletti, Gianluca Zia, Aurèle N’dja, Hermie Hermens, for the SPRINTT Consortium |
| Abstract |
Services making use of information and communication technology (ICT) are of potential interest to face the challenges of our aging society. Aim of this article is to describe the possible field of application for ICT-supported services in the management of older adults, in particular those with functional impairment. The current status of ICT-supported services is described and examples of how these services can be implemented in everyday practice are given. Upcoming technical solutions and future directions are also addressed. An ICT-supported service is not only the technological tool, but its combination with clinical purposes for which it is used and the way it is implemented in everyday care. Patient's satisfaction with ICT-supported services is moderate to good. Actual use of patients is higher than those of professionals but very variable. Frequency of use is positively related to clinical outcome. ICT offers a variety of opportunities for the treatment and prevention of frailty and functional decline. Future challenges are related to the intelligence of the systems and making the technologies even more unobtrusive and intuitive. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 185 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 183 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 23 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 11% |
| Researcher | 15 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 38 | 21% |
| Unknown | 59 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 41 | 22% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 34 | 18% |
| Psychology | 11 | 6% |
| Engineering | 8 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 25 | 14% |
| Unknown | 61 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 20 February 2017.
All research outputs
#17,289,387
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Aging Clinical and Experimental Research
#1,309
of 1,867 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#271,916
of 429,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Aging Clinical and Experimental Research
#24
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,867 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 429,059 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.