Gerontechnology Evaluation Framework: Outcome Validation

NCT06146868 | Unknown

• 1 other identifier: Gerontechnology Outcome
• Study Type: observational
• Target: 300
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

The project aims to validate the evaluation indicators applicability of 9 Gerontechnology Evaluation Frameworks. The outcome is the perceived importance of the evaluation indicators described in the 9 Evaluation Frameworks. Participants will be invited to complete a questionnaire indicating the importance of the outcomes.

Conditions

Technology

Keywords

Gerontechnology; Outcome indicators

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (9)

• Degree of importance on indicators of fall prevention Framework

  The level of agreement on indicators of fall prevention Framework. The opinions will be categorized into four levels of consensus according to the central tendency, level of dispersion, and the rated level of importance (Shi et al., 2022). The consensus levels are defined as: very high consensus (median = 5, inter-quartile range (IQR) = 0, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); high consensus (median = 5, IQR = 1, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); moderate consensus (median = 4-5, IQR = 1, rating score 4/5 ≥ 75%), and low consensus (median ≤ 4, IQR ≤ 2, rating score 4/5 \< 75%).

  3 months

• Degree of importance on indicators of health monitoring Framework

  The level of agreement on indicators of health monitoring Framework. The opinions will be categorized into four levels of consensus according to the central tendency, level of dispersion, and the rated level of importance (Shi et al., 2022). The consensus levels are defined as: very high consensus (median = 5, inter-quartile range (IQR) = 0, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); high consensus (median = 5, IQR = 1, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); moderate consensus (median = 4-5, IQR = 1, rating score 4/5 ≥ 75%), and low consensus (median ≤ 4, IQR ≤ 2, rating score 4/5 \< 75%).

  3 months

• Degree of importance on indicators of transfer and lifting Framework

  The level of agreement on indicators of transfer and lifting Framework. The opinions will be categorized into four levels of consensus according to the central tendency, level of dispersion, and the rated level of importance (Shi et al., 2022). The consensus levels are defined as: very high consensus (median = 5, inter-quartile range (IQR) = 0, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); high consensus (median = 5, IQR = 1, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); moderate consensus (median = 4-5, IQR = 1, rating score 4/5 ≥ 75%), and low consensus (median ≤ 4, IQR ≤ 2, rating score 4/5 \< 75%).

  3 months

• Degree of importance on indicators of hygiene management Framework

  The level of agreement on indicators of hygiene management Framework. The opinions will be categorized into four levels of consensus according to the central tendency, level of dispersion, and the rated level of importance (Shi et al., 2022). The consensus levels are defined as: very high consensus (median = 5, inter-quartile range (IQR) = 0, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); high consensus (median = 5, IQR = 1, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); moderate consensus (median = 4-5, IQR = 1, rating score 4/5 ≥ 75%), and low consensus (median ≤ 4, IQR ≤ 2, rating score 4/5 \< 75%).

  3 months

• Degree of importance on indicators of communication Framework

  The level of agreement on indicators of communication Framework. The opinions will be categorized into four levels of consensus according to the central tendency, level of dispersion, and the rated level of importance (Shi et al., 2022). The consensus levels are defined as: very high consensus (median = 5, inter-quartile range (IQR) = 0, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); high consensus (median = 5, IQR = 1, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); moderate consensus (median = 4-5, IQR = 1, rating score 4/5 ≥ 75%), and low consensus (median ≤ 4, IQR ≤ 2, rating score 4/5 \< 75%).

  3 months

• Degree of importance on indicators of anti-wandering Framework

  The level of agreement on indicators of anti-wandering Framework. The opinions will be categorized into four levels of consensus according to the central tendency, level of dispersion, and the rated level of importance (Shi et al., 2022). The consensus levels are defined as: very high consensus (median = 5, inter-quartile range (IQR) = 0, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); high consensus (median = 5, IQR = 1, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); moderate consensus (median = 4-5, IQR = 1, rating score 4/5 ≥ 75%), and low consensus (median ≤ 4, IQR ≤ 2, rating score 4/5 \< 75%).

  3 months

• Degree of importance on indicators of air quality sensor Framework

  The level of agreement on indicators of air quality sensor Framework. The opinions will be categorized into four levels of consensus according to the central tendency, level of dispersion, and the rated level of importance (Shi et al., 2022). The consensus levels are defined as: very high consensus (median = 5, inter-quartile range (IQR) = 0, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); high consensus (median = 5, IQR = 1, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); moderate consensus (median = 4-5, IQR = 1, rating score 4/5 ≥ 75%), and low consensus (median ≤ 4, IQR ≤ 2, rating score 4/5 \< 75%).

  3 months

• Degree of importance on indicators of feeding tools Framework

  The level of agreement on indicators of feeding tools Framework. The opinions will be categorized into four levels of consensus according to the central tendency, level of dispersion, and the rated level of importance (Shi et al., 2022). The consensus levels are defined as: very high consensus (median = 5, inter-quartile range (IQR) = 0, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); high consensus (median = 5, IQR = 1, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); moderate consensus (median = 4-5, IQR = 1, rating score 4/5 ≥ 75%), and low consensus (median ≤ 4, IQR ≤ 2, rating score 4/5 \< 75%).

  3 months

• Degree of importance on indicators of cognitive training and stimulation Framework

  The level of agreement on indicators of cognitive training and stimulation Framework. The opinions will be categorized into four levels of consensus according to the central tendency, level of dispersion, and the rated level of importance (Shi et al., 2022). The consensus levels are defined as: very high consensus (median = 5, inter-quartile range (IQR) = 0, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); high consensus (median = 5, IQR = 1, rating score of 4/5 ≥ 80%); moderate consensus (median = 4-5, IQR = 1, rating score 4/5 ≥ 75%), and low consensus (median ≤ 4, IQR ≤ 2, rating score 4/5 \< 75%).

  3 months

Study Arms (4)

Staff

A cross-sectional survey will be conducted.

Other: Doing questionnaire

User

A cross-sectional survey will be conducted.

Other: Doing questionnaire

Caregiver

A cross-sectional survey will be conducted.

Other: Doing questionnaire

Supplier

A cross-sectional survey will be conducted.

Other: Doing questionnaire

Interventions

Doing questionnaire OTHER

Participants will provide their opinions in a questionnaire

Caregiver; Staff; Supplier; User

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 18 Years+
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)
• Sampling Method: Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Stakeholders of gerontechnology in Hong Kong

You may qualify if:

• People in one of these categories: Working or has worked in a social service setting for the elderly or person with disability (Staff), an elderly aged 60 or above (User), a person with physical or disability (User), an informal caregiver for an elderly or a person with disability (Caregiver), or belonging to a company/or that has developed or retailed gerontechnology products (Supplier)

You may not qualify if:

• Unable to read or write in Chinese

Sponsors & Collaborators

• The University of Hong Kong: lead
• Gerontechnology Platform, The Social Innovation and Entrepreneurship Development Fund: collaborator

Study Sites (1)

The University of Hong Kong

Hong Kong, Hong Kong

Location

Related Publications (1)

• Shi C, Wong GHY, Choy JCP, Wong KKY, Lum TYS, Yu DSF. Are we on the same page? Multiple stakeholders and service users priorities for dementia care and policy: A Delphi study. Int J Nurs Stud. 2022 Sep;133:104300. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2022.104300. Epub 2022 May 28.

  PMID: 35751948 BACKGROUND

Central Study Contacts

Yee Tak Cheung, PhD

CONTACT

3917 6652; derekcheung@hku.hk

Study Design

• Study Type: observational
• Observational Model: COHORT
• Time Perspective: PROSPECTIVE
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Assistant Professor

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: November 17, 2023
• First Posted: November 27, 2023
• Study Start: November 1, 2023
• Primary Completion: January 1, 2024
• Study Completion: June 1, 2024
• Last Updated: November 29, 2023

Record last verified: 2023-11

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

HK (1)