People with intellectual disabilities living in care facilities engaging in virtual social contact: A systematic review of the feasibility and effects on <scp>well‐being</scp>

Bakkum, Lianne; Schuengel, Carlo; Sterkenburg, P.S.; Frielink, Noud; Embregts, P.J.C.M.; Schipper, J. Clasien de; Brug, Annet ten; Tharner, Anne

doi:10.1111/jar.12926

Cited by 20 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In our systematic review, 3% of the articles were labelled relevant during the title and abstract screening and eventually, <1% of all initial articles were included. These percentages are low, and are in line with the three above-mentioned reviews (1%–2% and 0%–1%, respectively) 25 28 29. Still, relevancy and inclusion rates are much lower when compared with ‘classic’ systematic reviews.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 75%

“…Since the introduction of the ASReview tool in 2021, it was applied in seven published reviews 25–31. An important note to make is that only one25 clearly reported AI-related choices in the methods and a complete and transparent flowchart reflecting the study selection process in the Results section.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two reviews reported a relatively small number (<400) of articles to screen,26 27 of which more than 75% of the articles were screened before the stopping criterion was met, so the amount of time saved was limited. Also, three reviews reported many initial articles (>6000)25 28 29 and one reported 892 articles,31 of which only 5%–10% needed to be screened. So in these reviews, the AI tool saved an impressive amount of screening time.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Artificial intelligence in systematic reviews: promising when appropriately used

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundSystematic reviews provide a structured overview of the available evidence in medical-scientific research. However, due to the increasing medical-scientific research output, it is a time-consuming task to conduct systematic reviews. To accelerate this process, artificial intelligence (AI) can be used in the review process. In this communication paper, we suggest how to conduct a transparent and reliable systematic review using the AI tool ‘ASReview’ in the title and abstract screening.MethodsUse of the AI tool consisted of several steps. First, the tool required training of its algorithm with several prelabelled articles prior to screening. Next, using a researcher-in-the-loop algorithm, the AI tool proposed the article with the highest probability of being relevant. The reviewer then decided on relevancy of each article proposed. This process was continued until the stopping criterion was reached. All articles labelled relevant by the reviewer were screened on full text.ResultsConsiderations to ensure methodological quality when using AI in systematic reviews included: the choice of whether to use AI, the need of both deduplication and checking for inter-reviewer agreement, how to choose a stopping criterion and the quality of reporting. Using the tool in our review resulted in much time saved: only 23% of the articles were assessed by the reviewer.ConclusionThe AI tool is a promising innovation for the current systematic reviewing practice, as long as it is appropriately used and methodological quality can be assured.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42022283952.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 75%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Artificial intelligence in systematic reviews: promising when appropriately used

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This has led to a growing consensus and explicit recognition across health and social care policies and strategies that digital technology has a critical role to play in addressing the exclusion and inequality experienced by this population. Indeed, in response to reforms enshrined in Children's Services (Curran, 2010), Adult Social Care (Department for Health and Social Care, 2018) and the National Health Service (NHS) Long‐Term Plan (NHS, 2019), public and voluntary organisations across the UK have pioneered the application of innovative ‘digital advocacy’ tools for the design and delivery of care and support for people with intellectual disabilities in partnership with their families and a range of professional and service‐provider agencies (Bakkum et al, 2022; Martin et al, 2021; Trevisan, 2016). This typically entails the use of consumer mobile devices and specially adapted social media‐style Apps alongside new models of communication and interaction between citizens and service providers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using multimedia technology to enhance self‐advocacy of people with intellectual disabilities: Introducing a theoretical framework for ‘Multimedia Advocacy’

Watts

Kwiatkowska

Minnion

2023

Research Intellect Disabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Multimedia Advocacy is the use of digital technology for people with intellectual disabilities as means of developing identities, being heard, connecting to family and care networks and, advocating for change. Methods We explore principles and theories that underpin Multimedia Advocacy, mapping disciplinary approaches that have influenced the concept and praxis. Results We describe relevant theories from cultural and media studies, personal therapeutic practices, communication, universal design, and systemic adoption of technology. We discuss new ways of achieving person‐centred working with digital technology. We aim to develop a stronger theory/practice dialogue between these disciplines. Conclusions The theories described highlight the importance of embedding access and use of digital technology within everyday settings. Long‐term implementation plans and buy‐in from all organisational levels are required for Multimedia Advocacy tools to be embraced by health and social care systems so the voice of an individual is included and genuine person‐centred practice is achieved.

show abstract

“…Miscommunication hinders the quality of social interactions between caregivers and children with visual or visual-and-intellectual disabilities (Sakkalou et al, 2021). Technology facilitates social interaction for people with disabilities (Bakkum et al, 2021; Dyzel et al, 2020). Improving sensitive and responsive caregiver behaviour is key in improving the caregiver–child relationship (Feniger-Schaal & Joels, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

For happy children with a visual or visual-and-intellectual disability: Efficacy research to promote sensitive caregiving with the Barti-mat

Dyzel

Dekkers-Verbon

Toeters

et al. 2021

British Journal of Visual Impairment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cycles of miscommunication often occur within the caregiver–child dyad when a child has a visual or visual-and-intellectual disability, influencing sensitive and responsive caregiver behaviour and child happiness. This study aims to examine the efficacy of using interactive technology, the Barti-mat, to promote sensitive and responsive caregiver behaviour, specifically mirroring behaviour, and increase the happiness of children with a visual or visual-and-intellectual disability. The secondary aim is to examine the social validity of the Barti-mat. A mixed-method approach was used, combining quantitative data from a multiple within-series single-case design and qualitative data comparing play-as-usual with play on the Barti-mat. Eleven caregiver–child dyads participated in a home-based study. No significant effects were found for Attunement nor for Valence. Significant improvements were found for Total Mirroring, Happiness, and Arousal. Overall, the caregivers enjoyed using the Bart-mat and were enthusiastic about the development of specialized play material for children with visual impairments. Results of the current study suggest that the Barti-mat can act as catalyst for caregiver mirroring behaviour and improve the happiness of a child with a visual or visual-and-intellectual disability. Caregivers were generally motivated to use and recommend the Barti-mat again. Minor product improvement recommendations were made. The Barti-mat is appropriate for a diverse group of caregivers and children with a visual or visual-and-intellectual disability and would be a good adjunct to preventive attachment-based interventions.

show abstract

People with intellectual disabilities living in care facilities engaging in virtual social contact: A systematic review of the feasibility and effects on well‐being

Cited by 20 publications

References 51 publications

Artificial intelligence in systematic reviews: promising when appropriately used

Artificial intelligence in systematic reviews: promising when appropriately used

Using multimedia technology to enhance self‐advocacy of people with intellectual disabilities: Introducing a theoretical framework for ‘Multimedia Advocacy’

For happy children with a visual or visual-and-intellectual disability: Efficacy research to promote sensitive caregiving with the Barti-mat

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About