Gerontechnology Evaluation Framework: Outcome Validation
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
This study is a cross-sectional survey. 165 to 300 participants will be recruited to complete a questionnaire. For each product theme that they are familiar with, they will rate anonymously the perceived importance of the evaluation indicators on a 5-point Likert scale, give reasons for their ratings and suggest revisions.
Participants will be recruited through convenience sampling in 3 subgroups, including (1) members of Gerontechnology Application and Testing Working Group under Gerontechnology Platform, (2) successful applicants of Innovation and Technology Fund for buying gerontechnology products under the 9 themes, and (3) visitors of Gerontech and Innovation Expo. It is expected that 35% participants will be recruited in subgroup 1, 5% in subgroup 2, and 60% in subgroup 3.
Gerontechnology Platform will invite (1) its members of Gerontechnology Application and Testing Working Group, who are the Users, Caregivers, Staff and Suppliers of gerontechnology products, to fill in the questionnaire online. 3 email reminders will be sent to remind them to complete the questionnaire. (2) The list of successful applicants of Innovation and Technology Fund who applied for the product themes covered in the 9 Evaluation Frameworks will be downloaded from the Social Welfare Department website and their Staff will be invited to fill in the questionnaire online. (3) In Gerontech and Innovation Expo, which is a local exhibition that provides a platform for stakeholders to discuss and collaborate for broader adoption of gerontechnology, research staff will approach all visitors of the Gerontechnology Platform booth. The visitors who fulfil the inclusion and exclusion criteria will be invited to complete the questionnaire.
To ensure the validity of their responses, they will only answer the questionnaire items of the themes they have known, have used, or are most interested. For each product theme that they are familiar with, they will rate anonymously the perceived importance of the evaluation indicators on a 5-point Likert scale, give reasons for their ratings and suggest revisions. Their voluntary written consent will be sought before they complete the questionnaire. Each questionnaire will take around 5 - 10 minutes.
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Estimated)
Enrollment
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
Study Contact
- Name: Yee Tak Cheung, PhD
- Phone Number: +852 3917 6652
- Email: derekcheung@hku.hk
Study Locations
-
-
-
Hong Kong, Hong Kong
- The University of Hong Kong
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
- Adult
- Older Adult
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Sampling Method
Study Population
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- 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)
Exclusion Criteria:
- Unable to read or write in Chinese
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
Number of groups / cohorts
Cohorts and Interventions
Group / CohortGroup / Cohort |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Staff
A cross-sectional survey will be conducted.
|
Participants will provide their opinions in a questionnaire
|
|
User
A cross-sectional survey will be conducted.
|
Participants will provide their opinions in a questionnaire
|
|
Caregiver
A cross-sectional survey will be conducted.
|
Participants will provide their opinions in a questionnaire
|
|
Supplier
A cross-sectional survey will be conducted.
|
Participants will provide their opinions in a questionnaire
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Degree of importance on indicators of fall prevention Framework
Time Frame: 3 months
|
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
Time Frame: 3 months
|
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
Time Frame: 3 months
|
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
Time Frame: 3 months
|
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
Time Frame: 3 months
|
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
Time Frame: 3 months
|
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
Time Frame: 3 months
|
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
Time Frame: 3 months
|
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
Time Frame: 3 months
|
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
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Collaborators
Collaborators
Publications and helpful links
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Estimated)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Estimated)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Estimated)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- Gerontechnology Outcome
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
IPD Plan Description
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.