The process of co-creating the interface for VENSTER, an interactive artwork for nursing home residents with dementia

References

• Anderiesen H, Scherder EJA, Goossens RHM, et al. A systematic review-physical activity in dementia: the influence of the nursing home environment. Appl Ergon. 2014;45:1678–1686.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kolanowski AM, Resnick B, Beck C, et al. Advances in nonpharmacological interventions, 2011–2012. Res Gerontol Nurs. 2013;6:5–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Douglas S, James I, Ballard C. Non-pharmacological interventions in dementia. Adv Psychiatr Treat. 2004;10:171–177.
   Google Scholar
• Hulme C, Wright J, Crocker T, et al. Non-pharmacological approaches for dementia that informal carers might try or access: a systematic review. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2010;25:756–763.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• den Ouden M, Bleijlevens MH, Meijers JM, et al. Daily (in)activities of nursing home residents in their wards: an observation study. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2015;16:963–968.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson J. Deeper than reason: emotion and its role in literature, music, and art. Oxford: Clarendon Press; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Steerneman P. Uit de Kunst. Zuid Magazine. 2012. Available from: https://issuu.com/zuidmediagroep/docs/zuid-nov12-preview
   Google Scholar
• Luyten T, Braun S, Jamin G, et al. How nursing home residents with dementia respond to the interactive art installation ‘VENSTER’: a pilot study. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2017;1–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dourish P. Where the action is: the foundations of embodied interaction. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press; 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Rokeby D. The construction of experience: interface as content. In: Dodsworth Jr C, editor. Digital illusion: entertaining the future with high technology. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company; 1998; p. 27–48.
   Google Scholar
• Refsgaard A. Eye conductor. Copenhagen; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Roosegaarde D. Lunar. Breda; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Schuivens D, Chen J. Mergent. the Netherlands: CRDL; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Braun SM, Kleynen M, Bleijlevens MH, et al. “Interactive surfaces” technology as a potential tool to stimulate physical activity in psychogeriatric nursing home residents. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2015;10:486–492.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charitos D, Bourdakis V, Gavrilou E. Embedding an audiovisual interactive installation environment in urban space for enhancing social interaction. Paper presented at: 2nd IET International Conference on the Intelligent Environments, 2006 (IE 06); 2006 July 5–6.
   Google Scholar
• Morrison A, Viller S, Mitchell P. Open-ended art environments motivate participation. Paper presented at: the Proceedings of the 8th international conference on advances in computer entertainment technology; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Morrison AJ, Mitchell P, Brereton M. The lens of ludic engagement: evaluating participation in interactive art installations. Paper presented at: the Proceedings of the 15th ACM international conference on Multimedia, Augsburg, Germany; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Sanders E, Stappers PJ. Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign. 2008;4:5–18.
   Google Scholar
• Boulos MNK, Wheeler S, Tavares C, et al. How smartphones are changing the face of mobile and participatory healthcare: an overview, with example from eCAALYX. Biomed Eng Online. 2011;10:24.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patrick K, Griswold WG, Raab F, et al. Health and the ,obile phone. Am J Prev Med. 2008;35:177–181.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donetto S, Tsianakas V, Robert G. Using experience-based co-design (EBCD) to improve the quality of healthcare: mapping where we are now and establishing future directions. London: King’s College London; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Participatiekompas. 2014. Available from: http://www.participatiekompas.nl
   Google Scholar
• AAL. Getting older adults really involved [cited 2015]. Available from: http://www.aal-europe.eu/support-to-projects/end-users/
   Google Scholar
• Dewey J. Art as experience. New York: Perigee Book; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Soranzo A, Cooksey D. Testing taxonomies: beyond card sorting. Bul Am Soc Info Sci Technol. 2015;41:34–39.
   Google Scholar
• Greenberg S, Carpendale S, Marquardt N, et al. Sketching user experiences. Waltham (MA): Morgan Kaufmann; 2012. p. 167–177.
   Google Scholar
• Krug S. Chapter 8. In: Davis N, editor. Rocket surgery made easy: the do-it-yourself guide to finding and fixing usability problems. Berkeley (CA): New Riders; 2010. p. 63–64.
   Google Scholar
• Martin B, Hanington BM. Universal methods of design: 100 ways to research complex problems, develop innovative ideas, and design effective solutions. Beverly (MA): Rockport Publishers; 2012. p. 204–206.
   Google Scholar
• Malcolm J, Hodkinson P, Colley H. The interrelationships between informal and formal learning. J Workplace Learn. 2003;15:313–318.
   Google Scholar
• LoGiudice D. Dementia: an update to refresh your memory. Intern Med J. 2002;32:535–540.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arean PA, Perri MG, Nezu AM, et al. Comparative effectiveness of social problem-solving therapy and reminiscence therapy as treatments for depression in older adults. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1993;61:1003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Banks MR, Banks WA. The effects of animal-assisted therapy on loneliness in an elderly population in long-term care facilities. J Gerontol Series A: Biol Sci Med Sci. 2002;57:M428–M432.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Camic PM, Tischler V, Pearman CH. Viewing and making art together: a multi-session art-gallery-based intervention for people with dementia and their carers. Aging Ment Health. 2014;18:161–168.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar