Advertisement

Elder Abuse pp 201-214 | Cite as

The Role of Technology in Elder Abuse Research

  • Scott R. BeachEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

We are in the midst of a technological revolution that is changing the world in fundamental ways. The digital revolution has changed the way we learn, work, communicate, and how we spend our leisure time. Technology has also revolutionized the conduct of scientific research across disciplines. Computerized data collection, smartphone applications, video and sensor-based technologies, physiological monitoring, brain imaging techniques, and data mining algorithms for “big data” are just a few examples. This chapter focuses on the role of technology in elder abuse research. The primary goal of the chapter is to provide an overview of how technology has been used thus far in elder abuse research, and, more importantly, to stimulate thinking about how it might be used in the future.

Keywords

Elder abuse Technology Surveys Video monitoring Forensics Data mining Brain imaging 

References

  1. 1.
    Acierno R, Hernandez MA, Amstadter AB, Resnick HS, Steve K, Muzzy W, Kilpatrick DG. Prevalence and correlates of emotional, physical, sexual, and financial abuse and potential neglect in the United States: the National Elder Mistreatment Study. Am J Public Health. 2010;100(2):292–7.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    ASPE (Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation). Congressional report on the feasibility of establishing a uniform national database on elder abuse. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation; 2010.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Beach SR, Schulz R, Degenholtz HB, Castle NG, Rosen J, Fox AR, Morycz RK. Using audio computer-assisted self-interviewing and interactive voice response to measure elder mistreatment in older adults: feasibility and effects on prevalence estimates. J Off Stat. 2010;26:507–33.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bharucha AJ, Anand V, Forlizzi J, Dew MA, Reynolds CF, Stevens S, Wactlar H. Intelligent assistive technology applications to dementia care: current capabilities, limitations, and future challenges. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2009;17(2):88–104.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bharucha AJ, Atkeson C, Chen D. CareMedia: automated video and sensor analysis for geriatric care [abstract]. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2006;7:B9.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bharucha AJ, London AJ, Barnard D, Wactlar H, Dew MA, Reynolds CF. Ethical considerations in the conduct of electronic surveillance research. J Law Med Eth Fall. 2006;2006:611–9.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Biggs S, Manthorpe J, Tinker A, Doyle M, Erens B. Mistreatment of older people in the United Kingdom: findings from the first national prevalence study. J Elder Abuse Negl. 2009;21:1–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Castle E, Eisenberger NI, Seeman TE, Moons WG, Boggero IA, Grinblatt MS, Taylor SE. Neural and behavioral bases of age differences in perceptions of trust. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2012;109:20848–52.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
  10. 10.
    Conrad KJ, Iris M, Ridings JW, Fairman KP, Rosen A, Wilber KH. Conceptual model and map of financial exploitation of older adults. J Elder Abuse Negl. 2011;23:304–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Conrad KJ, Iris M, Ridings JW, Langley K, Wilber KH. Self-report measure of financial exploitation of older adults. Gerontol. 2010;50(6):758–73.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Conrad KJ, Iris M, Ridings JW, Langley K, Anetzberger GJ. Self-report measure of psychological abuse of older adults. Gerontol. 2010;51(3):354–66.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Conrad KJ, Iris M, Ridings JW, Rosen A, Fairman KP, Anetzberger GJ. Conceptual model and map of psychological abuse of older adults. J Elder Abuse Negl. 2011;23:147–68.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Conrad KJ, Iris M, Riley BB, Mensah E, Mazza J. Developing end-user criteria and a prototype for an elder abuse assessment system. Research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice; 2013.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cooper C, Selwood A, Blanchard M, Walker Z, Blizard R, Livingston G. The determinants of family carers’ abusive behaviour to people with dementia: results of the CARD study. J Affect Disord. 2010;121:136–42.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Couper MP. Technology and the survey interview/questionnaire. In: Conrad FG, Schober MF, editors. Envisioning the survey interview of the future. Hoboken: Wiley; 2008. p. 56–76.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    De Bellis MD, Woolley DP, Hooper SR. Neuropsychological findings in pediatric maltreatment: relationship of PTSD, dissociative symptoms, and abuse/neglect indices to neurocognitive outcomes. Child Maltreat. 2013;18:171–83.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    DeMars C. Item response theory. New York: Oxford University Press; 2010.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dong X, Chang E, Wong E, Simon MA. The perceptions, social determinants, and negative health outcomes associated with depressive symptoms among U.S. Chinese older adults. Gerontol. 2012;52(5):650–63.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dyer CB, Connolly M, McFeeley P. The clinical and medical forensics of elder abuse and neglect. In: Bonnie RJ, Wallace RB, editors. Elder mistreatment: abuse, neglect, and exploitation in an aging America. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2003. p. 339–81.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    EADSS (Elder Abuse Decision Support System). http://eadss.org/. Accessed 01 Nov 2015.
  22. 22.
    Fulmer T, Guadagno L, Paveza G, VandeWeerd C, Baglioni A, Abraham I. Profiles of older adults who screen positive for neglect during an emergency department visit. J Elder Abuse Negl. 2002;14(1):49–60.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fulmer T, Paveza G, Abraham I, Fairchild S. Elder neglect assessment in the emergency department. J Emerg Nurs. 2000;26(5):436–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fulmer T, Strauss S, Russell S, Singh G, Blankenship J, Vemula R, Caceres B, Valenti M, Sutin D. Screening for elder mistreatment in dental and medical clinics. Gerontology. 2012;29(2):96–105.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    GAO. Elder justice: stronger federal leadership could enhance national response to elder abuse. Report to the Chairman, Special Committee on Aging, U.S. Senate. Washington, DC: United States Government Accountability Office; 2011.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Glaser D. Child abuse and neglect and the brain—a review. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2000;41:97–116.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Griffith HR, Stewart CC, Stoeckel LE, Okonkwo OC, den Hollander JA, Martin RC, Belue K, Copeland JN, Harrell LE, Brockington JC, Clark DG, Marson DC. Magnetic resonance imaging volume of the angular gyri predicts financial skill deficits in people with amnestic mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2010;58:265–74.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hawkins JW, Pearce CW, Skeith J, Dimitruk B, Roche R. Using technology to expedite screening and intervention for domestic abuse and neglect. Publ Health Nurs. 2009;26(1):58–69.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hwalek MA, Sengstock MC. Hwalek–Sengstock elder abuse screening test-revised. J Appl Gerontol. 1986;5(2):153–73.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    IOM (Institute of Medicine), NRC (National Research Council). Elder abuse and its prevention: workshop summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2014.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Iris M, Conrad KJ, Ridings J. Observational measure of elder self-neglect. J Elder Abuse Negl. 2014;26:365–97.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Knight N. Whole-body CT imaging in post-mortem detection of elder abuse and neglect. Presented at the national institute of justice elder abuse workshop, Washington, DC, February 25–27, 2008.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lachs M, Bachman R, Williams CS, O’Leary JR. Resident-to-resident elder mistreatment and police contact in nursing homes: findings from a population-based cohort. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2007;55(6):840–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Laumann EO, Leitsch SA, Waite LJ. Elder mistreatment in the United States: prevalence estimates from a nationally representative study. J Gerontol Soc Sci. 2008;63B:S248–54.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lifespan of Greater Rochester, Inc., Weill Cornell Medical Center of Cornell University, and New York City Department for the Aging. Under the radar: New York State elder abuse prevalence study. In: Self-reported prevalence and documented case surveys. New York: New York State Office of Children and Family Services; 2011.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lord FM. Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale: Erlbaum; 1980.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    McDonald L, Hitzig SL, Pillemer KA, Lachs MS, Beaulieu M, Brownell P, Burnes D, Caspi E. Developing a research agenda on resident-to-resident aggression: recommendations from a consensus conference. J Elder Abuse Negl. 2015;27:146–67.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Miller Steiger D, Conroy B. IVR: interactive voice response. In: De Leeuw E, Hox J, Dillman D, editors, International handbook of survey methodology. European Association of Methodology; 2008. p. 285–298.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Mosqueda L, Burnight K, Liao S. Bruising in the geriatric population. Research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice; 2006.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Moyer VA, on behalf of the U.S. Preventive Task Force. Screening for intimate partner violence and abuse of elderly and vulnerable adults: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158(6):478–86.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    National Research Council. Elder mistreatment: abuse, neglect and exploitation in an aging America. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2003.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Ngai EWT, Hu Y, Wong YH, Chen Y, Sun X. The application of data mining techniques in financial fraud detection: a classification framework and an academic review of literature. Decis Support Syst. 2011;50:559–69.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Perrin A, Duggan M. Americans’ Internet access: 2000–2015. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center; 2015.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Pillemer K, Connolly M, Breckman R, Spreng N, Lachs MS. Elder mistreatment: priorities for consideration by the White House Conference on Aging. Gerontol. 2015;55(2):320–7.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    PROMIS—Dynamic tools to measure health outcomes from the patient perspective. http://www.nihpromis.org/. Accessed 01 Nov 2015.
  46. 46.
    Rhodes KV. The promise and problems with using information technology to achieve routine screening for intimate partner violence. Fam Violence Prev Health Pract. 2005;3:1–14.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Rhodes KV, Lauderdale DS, He T, Howes DS, Levinson W. “Between me and the computer”: increased detection of intimate partner violence using a computer questionnaire. Ann Emerg Med. 2002;40(5):476–84.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Rosen T. Improving identification of and intervention for elder abuse in health care settings. Presented at NIH workshop on multiple approaches to understanding and preventing elder abuse, Bethesda, MD, October 30, 2015.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Rosen T, Pillemer K, Lachs M. Resident-to-resident aggression in long-term care facilities: an understudied problem. Aggress Violent Behav. 2008;13(2):77–87.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Russell SL, Fulmer T, Singh G, Valenti M, Vermula R, Strauss SM. Screening for elder mistreatment in a dental clinic population. J Elder Abuse Negl. 2012;24:326–39.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Schulz R, editor. Quality of life technology handbook. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2013.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Shinoda-Tagawa T, Leonard R, Pontikas J, McDonough JE, Allen D, Dreyer PI. Resident-to-resident violent incidents in nursing homes. J Am Med Assoc. 2004;291(5):591–8.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Sifford KS, Bharucha A. Benefits and challenges of electronic surveillance in nursing home research. Res Gerontol Nurs. 2010;3(1):5–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Skubic M, Rantz MJ, Miller SJ, Guevara RD, Koopman RJ, Alexander GL, Phillips LJ. Nonwearable in-home sensing for early detection of health changes. In: Schulz R, editor. Quality of life technology handbook. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2013. p. 227–44.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Sommerfeld DH, Henderson LB, Snider MA, Aarons GA. Multidimensional measurement within adult protective services: design and initial testing of the tool for risk, interventions, and outcomes. J Elder Abuse Negl. 2014;26:495–522.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Straus MA, Hamby SL, Boney-McCoy S, Sugarman DB. The revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2): development and preliminary psychometric data. J Fam Issues. 1996;17(3):283–316.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Tourangeau R, Yan T. Sensitive questions in surveys. Psychol Bull. 2007;133:859–83.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Tourangeau R, Rips LJ, Rasinski K. The psychology of survey response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2000.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Turner CF, Miller HG, Smith TK, Cooley PC, Rogers SM. Telephone audio computer-assisted self-interviewing (T-ACASI) and survey measurements of sensitive behaviors: preliminary results. In: Banks R, Fairgrieve J, Gerrard L, et al., editors. Survey and statistical computing. Chesham, Bucks, UK: Association for Survey Computing; 1996.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Wiglesworth A. Screening for abuse and neglect of people with dementia. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2010;58(3):493–500.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Wiglesworth A, Austin R, Corona M, Mosqueda L. Bruising as a forensic marker of physical elder abuse. Research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice; 2009.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Wiglesworth A, Austin R, Corona M, Schneider D, Liao S, Gibbs L, Mosqueda L. Bruising as a marker of physical elder abuse. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2009;57:1191–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Woolrych R, Zecevic A, Sixsmith A, Sims-Gould J, Feldman F, Chaudhury H, Symes B, Robinovitch SN. Using video capture to investigate the cause of falls in long-term care. Gerontol. 2015;55(3):483–94.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Yaffe MJ, Weiss D, Lithwick M. Seniors’ self-administration of the elder abuse suspicion index (EASI): a feasibility study. J Elder Abuse Negl. 2012;24(4):277–92.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Yaffe MJ, Wolfson C, Lithwick M, Weiss D. Development and validation of a tool to improve physician identification of elder abuse: the Elder Abuse Suspicion Index (EASI)©. J Elder Abuse Negl. 2008;20(3):276–300.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Zaslavsky V, Strizhak A. Credit card fraud detection using self-organizing maps. Inf Secur. 2006;18:48–63.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Ziminski CE, Wiglesworth A, Austin R, Phillips LR, Mosqueda L. Injury patterns and causal mechanisms of bruising in physical elder abuse. J Forensic Nurs. 2013;9(2):84–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University Center for Social and Urban ResearchUniversity of PittsburghPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations