Ambient Assisted Living: Assessment

  • Anabela G. SilvaEmail author
Part of the Human–Computer Interaction Series book series (HCIS)


AAL products need to be comprehensively evaluated before full-scale implementation can be advocated. This requires the stakeholders involved in AAL product development to look beyond the product itself and to include aspects such as ethics, impact on quality of care, meaningful use, economy or social impact in terms of quality of life. Therefore, the chapter reviews models and frameworks that can be applied when assessing AAL solutions.


  1. Glasgow RE, Vogt TM, Boles SM (1999) Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. Am J Public Health 89(9):1322–1327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Gschwind YJ et al (2015) The effect of sensor-based exercise at home on functional performance associated with fall risk in older people – a comparison of two exergame interventions. Eur Rev Aging Phys Act 12:11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Haux R et al (2016) Health-enabling and ambient assistive technologies: past, present, future. Yearbook Med Informatics 25(S 01):S76–S91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Hein A et al (2010) Monitoring systems for the support of home care. Inform Health Soc Care 35(3–4):157–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hill NL et al (2015) Feasibility study of an attention training application for older adults. Int J Older People Nursing 10(3):241–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hong X, Nugent CD (2009) Partitioning time series sensor data for activity recognitionGoogle Scholar
  7. Iglesias R, Gomez De Segura N, Iturburu M (2009a) The elderly interacting with a digital agenda through an RFID pen and a touch screenGoogle Scholar
  8. Iglesias R, Parra J, Segura NGD (2009b) Experiencing NFC-based touch for home healthcareGoogle Scholar
  9. Jennett P et al (2003) The socio-economic impact of telehealth: a systematic review. J Telemed Telecare 9(6):311–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kidholm K et al (2012) A model for assessment of telemedicine applications: mast. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 28(1):44–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lee C et al (2011) Integration of medication monitoring and communication technologies in designing a usability-enhanced home solution for older adultsGoogle Scholar
  12. Núñez-Naveira L et al (2016) UnderstAID, an ICT platform to help informal caregivers of people with dementia: a pilot randomized controlled study. Biomed Res Int 2016Google Scholar
  13. Nuovo AD et al (2014) A web based Multi-Modal Interface for elderly users of the Robot-Era multi-robot services. In: 2014 IEEE international conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC)Google Scholar
  14. Ogonowski C et al (2016) ICT-based fall prevention system for older adults: qualitative results from a long-term field study. ACM Trans Comput Hum Interact 23(5):1–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Østensen E et al (2014) Evaluation of ambient assisted living interventions-which tool to choose? in nursing informaticsGoogle Scholar
  16. Ribeiro VS et al (2015) Usability evaluation of a health care application based on IPTV. In: Conference on enterprise information systems/international conference on project management/conference on health and social care information systems and technologies, Centeris/Projman/Hcist 2015, M.M. Cruz-Cunha, et al., Editors, pp 635–642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sucerquia A, López JD, Vargas-Bonilla JF (2017) SisFall: a fall and movement dataset. Sensors (14248220) 17(1):1–14Google Scholar
  18. Venkatesh V et al (2003) User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Q 27:425–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Health Sciences SchoolUniversity of AveiroAveiroPortugal
  2. 2.Center for Health Technology and Services Research (CINTESIS)University of AveiroAveiroPortugal

Personalised recommendations