ArticleCanadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien2007
[Validation of indicators of the management of cognitive impairment in geriatric assessment units].
Article in Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of quality indicators for monitoring outcomes of frail elderly hospitalised in acute care health settings: study protocol.BMC health services research · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo analyze and adapt a set of quality indicators for assessment and management of patients with cognitive disorders, which are seen very frequently in geriatric assessment units in Quebec.
designModified Delphi technique.
settingProvince of Quebec.
participantsSeven clinicians from 3 different medical faculties in Quebec were selected for their expertise in dementia and geriatric care.
methodFrom among the indicators developed in 2001 using the RAND method, 22 items selected for their relevance to evaluation and management of cognitive disorders were adapted to clinical practice in the Quebec hospital system. These indicators, along with evidence from the literature, were submitted by mail to a panel of experts. The experts were asked to rate, on a scale of 1 to 9, their level of agreement with the indicators in terms of their validity and quality and the need for them to be recorded in patients' medical charts. For an indicator to be retained, it had to be accepted according to its median value, to be rated in the upper third of the scale, and to be approved by the panelists. Indicators not accepted at first were modified according to experts' comments and then re-submitted to the same panel for a second round.
resultsOf 22 indicators submitted in the first round, 21 were validated. They covered assessment, investigation, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up. The indicator found questionable was modified and then accepted during the second round.
conclusionThis study identified 22 indicators relevant to assessment and management of patients with cognitive disorders in geriatric assessment units. These indicators will serve as a basis for evaluation of dementia in a larger study of the quality of care in all short-term geriatric assessment units in Quebec.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18000272PMC2231490W1916500059What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.