Design considerations for the migration from paper to screen-based media in current health education for older adults: a scoping review

Abstract

ObjectivesTo map the current use of paper-based and/or screen-based media for health education aimed at older people.DesignA scoping review was reported following the Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses for Scoping Reviews checklist.Data sourcesThe search was carried out in seven databases (Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Medline, CINAHL, ACM Guide to Computing Literature, PsycINFO), with studies available from 2012 to the date of the search in 2022, in English, Portuguese, Italian or Spanish. In addition, Google Scholar was searched to check the grey literature. The terms used in the search strategy were older adults, health education, paper and screen-based media, preferences, intervention and other related terms.Eligibility criteriaStudies included were those that carried out health education interventions for older individuals using paper and/or screen-based media and that described barriers and/or facilitators to using these media.Data extraction and synthesisThe selection of studies was carried out by two reviewers. A data extraction form was developed with the aim of extracting and recording the main information from the studies. Data were analysed descriptively using Bardin’s content analysis.ResultsThe review included 21 studies that carried out health education interventions with different purposes, the main ones being promotion of physical activity, hypertension prevention and psychological health. All 21 interventions involved screen-based media on computers, tablets, smartphones and laptops, while only 4 involved paper-based media such as booklets, brochures, diaries, flyers and drawings. This appears to reflect a transition from paper to screen-based media for health education for the older population, in research if not in practice. However, analysis of facilitators and barriers to using both media revealed 10 design factors that could improve or reduce their use, and complementarity in their application to each media type. For example, screen-based media could have multimedia content, additional functionality and interactivity through good interaction design, but have low accessibility and require additional learning due to complex interface design. Conversely, paper-based media had static content and low functionality but high accessibility and availability and a low learning cost.ConclusionsWe recommend having improved screen-based media design, continued use of paper-based media and the possible combination of both media through the new augmented paper technology.Registration numberOpen Science Framework (DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/GKEAH).