RESUMO
The main objective of this study is the effect of Internet use on the subjective well-being of older adults. Based on the China General Social Survey 2021 cross-sectional data, 11 variables were selected from the perspective of sociology and demography. These variables include one dependent variable, three independent variables, and seven control variables. A binary logistic model was used to study the effects of the three dimensions of Internet use in the digital age (independent variables) on the subjective well-being of the elderly (dependent variable) with the elderly as the research object (N = 1836). The results of the study revealed that Internet use (P < 0.001, Exp(B) = 1.567), information sources (P < 0.001, Exp(B) = 1.695), and frequency of Internet use (P < 0.001, Exp(B) = 0.858) of the elderly had significant effects on their subjective well-being. To improve the subjective well-being of the elderly in the digital era, this paper proposes the following suggestions and countermeasures: 1) strengthen the digital infrastructure for the elderly and create an "Internet + elderly" model; 2) formulate relevant protective policies to promote Internet use among the elderly; 3) regulate the frequency of Internet access to maintain a balance between the virtual and real world. Conclusion: A thoughtful digitalization approach for the elderly can ensure they keep up with the times, bridge the "digital divide" between generations, extend their working lives, and enhance their subjective well-being. This study has some limitations. The object of the study is only the elderly in China, while the elderly in every country in the world have certain differences in subjective or objective conditions.
RESUMO
Objective: Mobile phone usage while performing postural-locomotor tasks is everyday activity across persons of all ages in various environmental contexts and health conditions. However, it is also an important factor contributing to accidents. To lower the risk of pedestrian accidents, this meta-analysis aimed to examine how mobile phones affect pedestrian gait and identify how mobile phone tasks and participant age affect gait differently. Methods: Electronic database searches were performed in The Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Medline. Two examiners evaluated the eligibility and quality of included studies using the Downs and Black checklist. The mean differences (MD) or standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated for each outcome. Subgroup analyses were used to compare the differential effects of mobile phone task and participant age on gait. Results: Among 22 eligible studies, 592 participants in 10 countries were analyzed in this meta-analysis. The overall meta-analysis showed that using a mobile phone significantly decreased pedestrian gait velocity (SMD = -1.45; 95% CI: -1.66 to -1.24; p < 0.00001; I2 = 66%), step length (SMD = -1.01; 95% CI: -1.43 to -0.59; p < 0.00001; I2 = 82%), and stride length (SMD = -0.9; 95% CI: -1.19 to -0.60; p < 0.00001; I2 = 79%), significantly increased pedestrian step time (SMD = 0.77; 95% CI: 0.45 to 1.08; p < 0.00001; I2 = 78%), stride time (SMD = 0.87; 95% CI: 0.69 to 1.06; p < 0.00001; I2 = 24%), step width (SMD = 0.79; 95% CI: 0.34 to 1.24; p = 0.0006. I2 = 75%), double support time (SMD = 1.09; 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.31; p < 0.00001; I2 = 42%), and double support (%gait cycle, %GC) (MD = 2.32; 95% CI: 1.75 to 2.88; p < 0.00001; I2 = 26%). Conclusion: In summary, the effects of mobile phone tasks and participant age on gait were inconsistent. Our study found that resource-intensive tasks (texting and reading) significantly reduced gait velocity, and step time; however, small resource-intensive tasks (calling, talking, and dialing) did not affect these outcomes. In contrast to young adults, step length and step time were not affected by mobile phone use in older adults. Tips: Pedestrians should consider using a mobile phone in their daily lives according to the application scenarios (walking environment, the complexity of mobile phone tasks, pedestrians' task processing abilities, etc.) as appropriate to avoid dangerous accidents. Systematic Review Registration: identifier CRD42022358963.
RESUMO
Objective: To investigate and contrast the effects of non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS), including repeated transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), on walking and balance ability in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). Methods: The PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane, CNKI, and Chinese WanFang databases were searched up to June 2022. Quality assessment was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk-of-bias guidelines, and the standardized mean differences (SMD) or mean differences (MD) for each outcome were calculated. Results: Among 32 eligible studies, including 1,586 participants were analyzed in this meta-analysis. The results of the meta-analysis showed that NIBS was effective in improving UPDRS-III scores (MD = -2.07; 95% CI, -2.62 to -1.53; P < 0.00001; I 2 = 6%) and variables associated with the ability of walk such as step width (SMD = 0.35; 95% CI, 0.16-0.55; P = 0.0005; I 2 = 38%), cadence (SMD = 0.3; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.55; P = 0.02; I 2 = 25%), and 6MWT (MD = 62.86; 95% CI, 39.43-86.29; P < 0.00001; I 2 = 0%). In subgroup analyses across intervention types, UPDRS-III scores (rTMS: MD = -2.54; 95% CI, -3.16 to -1.92; P < 0.00001; I 2 = 0%; tDCS: MD = -1.20; 95% CI, -1.99 to -0.40; P = 0.003; I 2 = 0%) and TUGT time (rTMS: MD = -4.11; 95% CI, -4.74 to -3.47; P < 0.00001; I 2 = 0%; tDCS: MD = -0.84; 95% CI, -1.48 to -0.21; P = 0.009; I 2 = 0%) significantly improved. Moreover, our results also showed that compared to tDCS, rTMS was more significant in improving UPDRS-III scores and TUGT time (p < 0.05). Conclusion: NIBS benefits some walking ability variables but not balance ability in 36 patients with PD. The rTMS significantly improved UPDRS-III scores and TUGT time compared to tDCS. Further studies are needed to determine the optimal protocol and to illuminate effects based on the ideal target brain regions, stimulation intensity, timing, and type of intervention. Systematic review registration: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42022350782.
