Table 4.

Extracted statements from included studies regarding facilitators and barriers to implementation of the technological intervention.

Authors	Statements Concerning Facilitators in Implementing Intervention	Classification (Implementation, Mechanism of Impact, Context)	Statements Concerning Barriers in Implementing Intervention	Classification (Implementation, Mechanism of Impact, Context)
Lee et al. [28]	Qualitative feedback from participants showed that they enjoyed and liked the memory training program. They considered that learning to use a computer was not difficult. They would recommend the training program to others.	Mechanism of impact	More regular stimulating positive feedback could be integrated into the training program. It is suggested to increase the number of training sessions from 12 to 15.	Implementation
Liao et al. [29]	The enjoyment and attractiveness of VR characteristics may increase motivation and lead to extensive training effects, resulting in cognitive improvement.	Mechanism of impact	None identified	Not applicable (N.A.)
McCarron et al. [30]	None identified	N.A.	The majority of participants did not find the technology useful. Reasons: (1) complexity of the SSA, (2) enrollment process, (3) impracticality, (4) stigma, and (5) functionality of the SSA.	Mechanism of impact
Mrakic-Sposta et al. [31]	None identified	N.A.	None identified	N.A.
Nishihura et al. [32]	Eleven of the fourteen participants received sufficient support from their main caregiver. For instance, the caregiver visited them more than once a week to maintain the electric calendar.	Context	Some negative comments about the lack of durability of the battery and difficulties inputting the schedule. Three participants mentioned they did not need it in their daily lives.	Mechanism of impact
	Feedback interviews revealed that most participants had positive impressions of using the electric calendar.	Mechanism of impact
Park and Park [33]	NCT can facilitate the training in a fun manner. Thus, NCT might motivate subjects more efficiently as compared to CCT, which may decrease issues with intervention compliance.	Mechanism of Impact	CCT had to be provided at a healthcare facility. Both training groups only received training individually, without opportunity for social interaction.	Implementation
Pietilä et al. [34]	None identified	N.A.	None identified	N.A.
Silva et al. [35]	SenseCam does not provoke negative evaluations, but suggests a beneficial action on mood. Authors refer to research suggesting that wearable cameras are less demanding than other external aids and are also less demanding and more motivating than paper and pencil cognitive exercises.	Mechanism of impact	None identified	N.A.
Vanoh et al. [36]	Group discussion was conducted to explain the proper ways to use the website, to describe the content in WESIHAT 2.0, and to identify the problems faced by subjects.	Implementation	Difficulties were reported by the intervention group in dealing with unknown people due to the fear of being deceived.	Implementation
	The counselling session was made interesting by having a quiz related to the content of WESIHAT 2.0 and playing free online brain games.	Mechanism of impact	The use of the compute requires complex motor functioning, language processing, and focus.	Mechanism of impact