Quasi-Experimental Designs as Alternatives to Randomized Controlled Trials in Assistive Technology Research for Older Adults: A Methodological Scoping Review of Causal Validity and Evidence Quality

Berikut adalah isian lengkap untuk OSF Project Description yang sesuai dengan manuskrip dan Collection target: OSF Project Description Title: Quasi-Experimental Designs as Alternatives to Randomized Controlled Trials in Assistive Technology Research for Older Adults: A Methodological Scoping Review of Causal Validity and Evidence Quality Description: This project hosts the pre-registered protocol, search documentation, screening records, data extraction files, and supplementary materials for a methodological scoping review examining the use and causal validity of quasi-experimental (QE) designs relative to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in assistive technology (AT) research for older adults (≥60 years). Background and Purpose. Randomized controlled trials are widely regarded as the methodological gold standard for establishing causal effects of health interventions. However, their implementation in assistive technology research for older adults is frequently constrained by ethical concerns (e.g., withholding functional devices from individuals with genuine disability needs), practical limitations (e.g., inability to blind participants to AT use, rapid technological obsolescence), and recruitment challenges in cognitively or physically impaired populations. As a result, a substantial proportion of the AT evidence base originates from quasi-experimental designs — including pre-post studies without control groups, interrupted time series (ITS), difference-in-differences (DID), regression discontinuity (RD), and propensity score matching (PSM) — which vary markedly in their capacity to support valid causal inference. Despite this heterogeneity, no methodological review has systematically mapped the distribution, internal validity profiles, and causal inference limitations of RCT versus QE designs across the assistive technology literature for older adults. This scoping review addresses that gap. Objectives. The review aims to: (1) systematically map the distribution of RCT and quasi-experimental study designs across AT domains (mobility, cognition, communication, sensory, daily living, smart home/ambient assisted living, wearable monitoring, socially assistive robotics) in the peer-reviewed literature from 2000 to 2025; (2) characterize the methodological features, internal validity threats, and causal inference capacity of the identified designs; (3) appraise the quality and risk of bias of included studies using design-appropriate tools (Cochrane RoB 2 for RCTs; EPHPP for controlled quasi-experimental studies; JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for uncontrolled pre-post studies; RoBiNT for single-case experimental designs); and (4) identify methodological gaps between the existing evidence base and the standards required for clinical guideline development and health technology assessment (HTA). Methods. This scoping review follows the JBI (Joanna Briggs Institute) framework for scoping reviews and will be reported according to the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. Systematic searches will be conducted across four electronic databases: Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, PubMed/MEDLINE, and IEEE Xplore Digital Library. Two independent reviewers will conduct all screening (title/abstract and full-text), data extraction, and quality appraisal stages. Inter-rater reliability will be measured using Cohen's kappa (target ≥0.80). Synthesis will follow a descriptive narrative approach in accordance with the Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis (SWiM) reporting guidelines; no meta-analytic pooling of effect sizes will be conducted. Expected Outcomes. It is anticipated that: (a) quasi-experimental designs, particularly uncontrolled pre-post studies, will constitute the majority of included studies; (b) RCTs will be more prevalent in pharmaceutical-adjacent AT domains (e.g., fall prevention, cognitive aids) compared to complex technology domains (e.g., smart home systems, socially assistive robots); (c) significant temporal variation will be observed, with more recent studies demonstrating greater methodological sophistication; (d) internal validity threats — particularly selection bias, confounding, and maturation — will be systematically underreported in quasi-experimental studies; and (e) a substantial proportion of included studies will lack adherence to established reporting guidelines (CONSORT for RCTs; TREND for QE studies). The review will produce: a PRISMA-ScR flow diagram; comprehensive tables of study characteristics, design distributions, and quality appraisal results; a causal validity comparison framework (RCT vs. QE design subtypes); an evidence gap matrix identifying under-researched AT domains and populations; and evidence-based methodological recommendations for AT researchers, evidence synthesizers, and HTA bodies. Target Journal. BMC Medical Research Methodology (BioMed Central / Springer Nature) — submitted to the open Collection: Causal Inference and Observational Data vol. 2 (submission deadline: 30 July 2026). Open Science Commitment. All project materials — including the registered protocol, complete search strings, Rayyan screening exports, extraction spreadsheets, quality appraisal records, coding frameworks, and the PRISMA-ScR checklist — will be made publicly available on this OSF project page upon manuscript acceptance. During the review process, materials are available under embargo to editors and peer reviewers upon request.