Trial reportBMC medical ethics2012
Promoting advance planning for health care and research among older adults: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC medical ethics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Barriers to advance care planning at the end of life: an explanatory systematic review of implementation studies.PloS one · 2015Pooled it
- Antibiotic Resistance Gene Expression in Veterinary Probiotics: Two Sides of the Coin.Veterinary sciences · 2025Review
- Planning ahead for research participation: survey of public and professional stakeholders' views about the acceptability and feasibility of advance research planning.BMC medical ethics · 2023Article
- Doctors' perspectives on adhering to advance care directives when making medical decisions for patients: an Australian interview study.BMJ open · 2019Article
- Planning Ahead for Dementia Research Participation: Insights from a Survey of Older Australians and Implications for Ethics, Law and Practice.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2019Article
- Who gets to decide for the older patient with a limited decision-making capacity: a review of surrogacy laws in the European Union.European geriatric medicine · 2018Review
- Reliability of health-related quality-of-life assessments made by older adults and significant others for health states of increasing cognitive impairment.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2017Article
- Research involving subjects with Alzheimer's disease in Italy: the possible role of family members.BMC medical ethics · 2015Article
- Do-not-hospitalize orders for individuals with advanced dementia: healthcare proxies' perspectives.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2013Article
- Mothers' preferences toward breaking bad news about their children cancer.Journal of family medicine and primary careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFamily members are often required to act as substitute decision-makers when health care or research participation decisions must be made for an incapacitated relative. Yet most families are unable to accurately predict older adult preferences regarding future health care and willingness to engage in research studies. Discussion and documentation of preferences could improve proxies' abilities to decide for their loved ones. This trial assesses the efficacy of an advance planning intervention in improving the accuracy of substitute decision-making and increasing the frequency of documented preferences for health care and research. It also investigates the financial impact on the healthcare system of improving substitute decision-making. METHODS/
designDyads (n = 240) comprising an older adult and his/her self-selected proxy are randomly allocated to the experimental or control group, after stratification for type of designated proxy and self-report of prior documentation of healthcare preferences. At baseline, clinical and research vignettes are used to elicit older adult preferences and assess the ability of their proxy to predict those preferences. Responses are elicited under four health states, ranging from the subject's current health state to severe dementia. For each state, we estimated the public costs of the healthcare services that would typically be provided to a patient under these scenarios. Experimental dyads are visited at home, twice, by a specially trained facilitator who communicates the dyad-specific results of the concordance assessment, helps older adults convey their wishes to their proxies, and offers assistance in completing a guide entitled My Preferences that we designed specifically for that purpose. In between these meetings, experimental dyads attend a group information session about My Preferences. Control dyads attend three monthly workshops aimed at promoting healthy behaviors. Concordance assessments are repeated at the end of the intervention and 6 months later to assess improvement in predictive accuracy and cost savings, if any. Copies of completed guides are made at the time of these assessments. DISCUSSION: This study will determine whether the tested intervention guides proxies in making decisions that concur with those of older adults, motivates the latter to record their wishes in writing, and yields savings for the healthcare system.
trial registrationISRCTN89993391.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.