Technology to support aging in place: key messages for policymakers and funders

Courtney Genge · Heather McNeil · Patricia Debergue · Shannon Freeman

34 citations0/0 files storedFrontiers in Psychology

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Technology Use by Older Adults Aging, Elder Care, and Social Issues Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility

Abstract

AgeTech, a subset of the health technology industry, uses technology to support healthy aging, and support care partners and health professionals to improve quality of life for aging adults. By enhancing and adapting alternative care approaches through emerging technologies, it is possible to enable and extend the ability for older adults to safely age in place within their own homes, improve care experiences, and/or decrease long-term care costs/needs. With the rapid development and proliferation of AgeTech into the consumer market, it is paramount for policymakers and funders to ensure that AgeTech solutions can be leveraged to support older adults to age well in place. This paper highlights five key messages for policymakers and funders drawing on experiences from Canada. First, it is essential to embrace a life course perspective on aging, recognizing the heterogeneity of older adults who experience diverse and evolving needs. AgeTech should adapt as needs and capacities evolve. Second, AgeTech should solve a real problem. Technology must be well aligned to the needs and preferences of older adults to be impactful. Third, health related AgeTech should empower, enhance, or support existing health care services, while recognizing the value of human interactions. In-person interactions can provide meaningful connection and important health data which should be enhanced not replaced. Fourth, the establishment and ongoing fostering of authentic partnerships to inform, co-create and co-design AgeTech solutions is key to developing successful products. Finally, policymakers and funders have an important role to play in enabling accelerated design, development and testing to meet current and future needs.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 34 citations exist upstream.

References

2014Factors influencing acceptance of technology for aging in place: A systematic review 2009New Directions in Life Course Research 2011Benefits of Co-design in Service Design Projects 2017Predicting the acceptance and use of information and communication technology by older adults: An empirical examination of the revised UTAUT2 2018Exploring Privilege in the Digital Divide: Implications for Theory, Policy, and Practice 2019Technology to Support Aging in Place: Older Adults’ Perspectives 2010Why Do Evaluations of eHealth Programs Fail? An Alternative Set of Guiding Principles 2015Ambient Assisted Living Technologies for Aging Well: A Scoping Review

Cited by

2024Robotic companions and healthy aging: A mixed-methods exploration of older adults' perspectives and insights 2024Digital Inclusion among Community Older Adults in the Republic of Korea: Measuring Digital Skills and Health Consequences

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.