2010
DOI: 10.1017/s1041610210001316
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

What do cognitively intact older people think about the use of electronic tracking devices for people with dementia? A preliminary analysis

Abstract: Cognitively intact older people favor the idea of tracking people with dementia. To facilitate family decision-making on the use of tracking devices, structured meetings guided by professionals and including persons with dementia and their family caregivers are suggested.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
24
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
1
24
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This type of 'tradeoff' highlights the potential for H-IoT to simultaneously violate and enhance privacy. A tradeoff has been observed between personal privacy and safety, particularly among the mentally impaired patients (Ojasalo et al 2010;Stowe and Harding 2010;Landau et al 2010), as well as frail elderly (Melenhorst et al 2004;Courtney 2008;Courtney et al 2008;Steele et al 2009), and chronically ill persons (Salih et al 2011;Neild et al 2004). In these contexts, it has been stressed that personal privacy can be both protected by eliminating the need for in-person care (Ojasalo et al 2010;Essén 2008) and violated by the presence of a monitoring device (Melenhorst et al 2004;Steele et al 2009;Salih et al 2011).…”
Section: Personal Privacymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…This type of 'tradeoff' highlights the potential for H-IoT to simultaneously violate and enhance privacy. A tradeoff has been observed between personal privacy and safety, particularly among the mentally impaired patients (Ojasalo et al 2010;Stowe and Harding 2010;Landau et al 2010), as well as frail elderly (Melenhorst et al 2004;Courtney 2008;Courtney et al 2008;Steele et al 2009), and chronically ill persons (Salih et al 2011;Neild et al 2004). In these contexts, it has been stressed that personal privacy can be both protected by eliminating the need for in-person care (Ojasalo et al 2010;Essén 2008) and violated by the presence of a monitoring device (Melenhorst et al 2004;Steele et al 2009;Salih et al 2011).…”
Section: Personal Privacymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The related concept of visibility refers to the degree to which a H-IoT device is noticeable to the user and others, both at home and in public (Robinson et al 2007;Landau et al 2010;Essén 2008;van Hoof et al 2011). Visibility is not equivalent to obtrusiveness.…”
Section: Obtrusiveness Stigma and Autonomymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Benefits to user safety are often the basis for adoption. However, safety interests can act as a constraint on autonomy, insofar as a "need" for H-IoT is perceived from the user that leads to adopting a device or service that would otherwise not be used [21,22]. Autonomy is constrained insofar as the patient experiences (both internally and externally imposed) pressure to use H-IoT.…”
Section: Respect Autonomy and Avoid Subtle Nudging Of User Behaviourmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Benefits like increased independence and a greater feeling of wellbeing are described leading to an improved quality of life brought about by the use of assistive digital devices [2,13,14].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%