Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25118091›Full record

Trial reportTrials2014

Effect evaluation of two types of dementia-specific case conferences in German nursing homes (FallDem) using a stepped-wedge design: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Sven Reuther, Daniela Holle, Ines Buscher, Olga Dortmann, René Müller, Sabine Bartholomeyczik, Margareta Halek

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Gender differences in caregiving among a schizophrenia population.Psychology research and behavior management · 2019
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sven ReutherGerman Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Witten, Stockumer Str, 12, 58453 Witten, Germany. sven.reuther@dzne.de.
Daniela Holle
Ines Buscher
Olga Dortmann
René Müller
Sabine Bartholomeyczik
Margareta Halek
German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases · DEWitten/Herdecke University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCase conferences for people with dementia and challenging behaviors (e.g., apathy) are recommended as useful tools that enable staff in nursing homes to understand the behavior of people with this type of disease. Understanding peoples' behaviors is the basis for the initiation of targeted interventions to improve the quality of care for people with dementia. Furthermore, case conferences demonstrate positive effects on burnout, dementia-specific burden, and vocational action competence of the staff. The two likely approaches for conducting case conferences include the following: A) using a structured assessment instrument, which guides the staff in understanding the residents' behaviors and B) using a narrative approach in which the staff must identify the reasons for the residents' behaviors in an unstructured manner. Case conferences are a complex intervention, and evaluating their multiple effects is challenging. The aim of this study protocol was to describe a likely solution for evaluating this type of complex intervention using a special cluster randomized trial.

methodsIn this stepped-wedged cluster randomized trial, the two interventions will be sequentially implemented every three months in a group of 12 nursing homes (clusters) with a minimum of 360 residents over 19 months (7 months of intervention for each cluster and follow-up). The primary outcome is the reduction of challenging behavior (measured with the neuropsychiatric inventory-nursing home version [NPI-NH]). Secondary outcomes are residents' quality of life, prescription of psychotropic medications, staff burnout, dementia-related stress, and vocational action competence. The effectiveness of the study will be accompanied by a process evaluation. The primary data will be analyzed using a Bayesian mixed effect model; the secondary data will be analyzed using descriptive statistics and mixed effects models. DISCUSSION: The implementation and effect measurement of complex interventions such as case conferences within a cluster randomized trial are challenging (e.g., complex and intensive training, delayed treatment effect). In this study protocol, the methodological advantages and disadvantages of using the stepped wedge design to answer the research questions are discussed.

trial registrationhttp://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN20203855; registered 10 July 2013.

Indexed as

Clinical ProtocolsResearch DesignBayes TheoremData CollectionDementiaHumansNursing HomesOutcome Assessment, Health CarePatient SelectionSample SizeStatistics as Topic

Identifiers

PMID25118091
PMCPMC4141097
OpenAlexW2109429120

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.