Barriers and facilitators of digital interventions use to reduce loneliness among older adults: a protocol for a qualitative systematic review

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Introduction

Digital interventions are considered as a potential solution to loneliness in older adults. However, this type of intervention has had limited acceptance among older adults (aged ≥60 years). To ensure the use of digital interventions in older adults, possible barriers and facilitating factors should be better understood from the user’s perspective. We aim to systematically examine the barriers and facilitators to the implementation of digital interventions designed to reduce loneliness in older adults by identifying, evaluating and synthesising qualitative studies.

Methods and analysis

A comprehensive search of qualitative studies for barriers and facilitators for use of digital interventions will be conducted in the following databases: PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Web of Science. Studies reported in English will be considered for this review. Grey literature will not be included. Two reviewers (HZ and XL) will independently screen the literatures, and any differences will be solved by turning to the third reviewer (JN). The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Qualitative Research Critical Appraisal Checklist will be used by two reviewers to independently assess the validity of the methods used. Relevant data about the populations, context, culture, geographical location, study methods and barriers and facilitators to the implementation of digital interventions will be extracted using the JBI standardised data extraction tool. JBI meta-aggregation methods will be implemented to synthesise the data, which will generate themes and categories based on the data. The final synthesis will establish confidence levels using the JBI ConQual approach.

Ethics and dissemination

The protocol does not require ethical approval. The data are based on published scientific databases. The results will be disseminated through journal articles and scientific conference presentations (if feasible).

PROSPERO registration number

CRD42022328609.

Related collections

Most cited references 88

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

Matthew J L Page, Joanne E McKenzie, Patrick Bossuyt … (2025)

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.

0 comments Cited 14649 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science

Laura Damschroder, David Aron, Rosalind E Keith … (2009)

Background Many interventions found to be effective in health services research studies fail to translate into meaningful patient care outcomes across multiple contexts. Health services researchers recognize the need to evaluate not only summative outcomes but also formative outcomes to assess the extent to which implementation is effective in a specific setting, prolongs sustainability, and promotes dissemination into other settings. Many implementation theories have been published to help promote effective implementation. However, they overlap considerably in the constructs included in individual theories, and a comparison of theories reveals that each is missing important constructs included in other theories. In addition, terminology and definitions are not consistent across theories. We describe the Consolidated Framework For Implementation Research (CFIR) that offers an overarching typology to promote implementation theory development and verification about what works where and why across multiple contexts. Methods We used a snowball sampling approach to identify published theories that were evaluated to identify constructs based on strength of conceptual or empirical support for influence on implementation, consistency in definitions, alignment with our own findings, and potential for measurement. We combined constructs across published theories that had different labels but were redundant or overlapping in definition, and we parsed apart constructs that conflated underlying concepts. Results The CFIR is composed of five major domains: intervention characteristics, outer setting, inner setting, characteristics of the individuals involved, and the process of implementation. Eight constructs were identified related to the intervention (e.g., evidence strength and quality), four constructs were identified related to outer setting (e.g., patient needs and resources), 12 constructs were identified related to inner setting (e.g., culture, leadership engagement), five constructs were identified related to individual characteristics, and eight constructs were identified related to process (e.g., plan, evaluate, and reflect). We present explicit definitions for each construct. Conclusion The CFIR provides a pragmatic structure for approaching complex, interacting, multi-level, and transient states of constructs in the real world by embracing, consolidating, and unifying key constructs from published implementation theories. It can be used to guide formative evaluations and build the implementation knowledge base across multiple studies and settings.

0 comments Cited 2803 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Multidisciplinary research priorities for the COVID-19 pandemic: a call for action for mental health science

Emily A. Holmes, Rory C O'Connor, V. Perry … (2020)

Summary The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is having a profound effect on all aspects of society, including mental health and physical health. We explore the psychological, social, and neuroscientific effects of COVID-19 and set out the immediate priorities and longer-term strategies for mental health science research. These priorities were informed by surveys of the public and an expert panel convened by the UK Academy of Medical Sciences and the mental health research charity, MQ: Transforming Mental Health, in the first weeks of the pandemic in the UK in March, 2020. We urge UK research funding agencies to work with researchers, people with lived experience, and others to establish a high level coordination group to ensure that these research priorities are addressed, and to allow new ones to be identified over time. The need to maintain high-quality research standards is imperative. International collaboration and a global perspective will be beneficial. An immediate priority is collecting high-quality data on the mental health effects of the COVID-19 pandemic across the whole population and vulnerable groups, and on brain function, cognition, and mental health of patients with COVID-19. There is an urgent need for research to address how mental health consequences for vulnerable groups can be mitigated under pandemic conditions, and on the impact of repeated media consumption and health messaging around COVID-19. Discovery, evaluation, and refinement of mechanistically driven interventions to address the psychological, social, and neuroscientific aspects of the pandemic are required. Rising to this challenge will require integration across disciplines and sectors, and should be done together with people with lived experience. New funding will be required to meet these priorities, and it can be efficiently leveraged by the UK's world-leading infrastructure. This Position Paper provides a strategy that may be both adapted for, and integrated with, research efforts in other countries.

0 comments Cited 2619 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): BMJ Open

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): BMJ Open

Journal ID (hwp): bmjopen

Journal ID (publisher-id): bmjopen

Title: BMJ Open

Publisher: BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )

ISSN (Electronic): 2044-6055

Publication date Collection: 2022

Publication date (Electronic): 1 December 2022

Volume: 12

Issue: 12

Electronic Location Identifier: e067858

Affiliations

[1 ]departmentXiangya School of Nursing , Central South University , Changsha, Hunan, China

[2 ]departmentDepartment of Nursing Science , University of Turku , Turku, Finland

[3 ]departmentXiangya-Oceanwide Health Management Research Institute , Central South University , Changsha, Hunan, China

Author notes

[Correspondence to ] Professor Hui Feng; feng.hui@ 123456csu.edu.cn

Author information

Hongyu Zhang http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5704-4907

Maritta Välimäki http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7234-2454

Hui Feng http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6930-4780

Article

Publisher ID: bmjopen-2022-067858

DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-067858

PMC ID: 9716780

PubMed ID: 36456019

SO-VID: 768d0433-dd88-4c6a-abff-bbedffc8b339

License:

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

History

Date received : 28 August 2022

Date accepted : 16 November 2022

Funding

Funded by: Program of China;

Award ID: 2020YFC2008500

Funded by: the National Key R&D Program of China;

Award ID: 2020YFC2008500, 2020YFC2008503, 2020YFC2008602

Funded by: the Special Funding for the Construction of Innovative Provinces in Hunan;

Award ID: 2020SK2055

Custom metadata

special-feature unlocked

ScienceOpen disciplines: Medicine

Keywords: geriatric medicine,quality in health care,primary care,health informatics,telemedicine,information technology

Data availability:

ScienceOpen disciplines: Medicine

Keywords: geriatric medicine, quality in health care, primary care, health informatics, telemedicine, information technology

Barriers and facilitators of digital interventions use to reduce loneliness among older adults: a protocol for a qualitative systematic review

Read this article at

Abstract

Introduction

Methods and analysis

Ethics and dissemination

PROSPERO registration number

Related collections

Telemedicine

Most cited references 88

The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science

Multidisciplinary research priorities for the COVID-19 pandemic: a call for action for mental health science

Author and article information

Journal

Affiliations

Author notes

Author information

Article

History

Funding

Categories

Custom metadata

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 479

Cited by 1

Most referenced authors 1,572