ArticleBMJ open2017
Development of a discussion tool to enable well-being by providing choices for people with dementia: a qualitative study incorporating codesign and participatory action research.
Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Co-design development of a decision guide on eating and drinking for people with severe dementia during acute hospital admissions.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023Pooled it
- A systematic review of co-production approaches that involve family members, loved ones, or carers in the development of mental health or substance use resources/interventions.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Review
- Communicating the risk of dementia: a scoping review.BMJ neurology open · 2025Article
- Partnering with people living with dementia and care partners in technology research and design: Reflections and recommendations.Australian occupational therapy journal · 2022Article
- Article
- Risk Negotiation With People With Dementia: From Co-designed Paper Version to Implementation Preparation of an Electronic Conversation Tool.Gerontology & geriatric medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo codesign a discussion tool to facilitate negotiation of risk between health professionals, people with dementia and carers.
methodsA qualitative approach using codesign. Thematic analysis was used to analyse interviews and focus groups with people with dementia, carers, healthcare staff and healthy older people exploring the issue of risk in dementia, the acceptability and development of a discussion tool.
resultsSixty-one participants identified the breadth, depth and complexity of risk in dementia care and the need for individualised solutions. They also deemed a discussion tool to facilitate negotiation of risk was acceptable and responses informed the tool development. Twenty-two participants provided feedback that was used to refine the final version.
conclusionOur discussion tool enables choices for people with dementia by focusing on abilities rather than deficits and assists health professionals to deliver person-centred care. Flash cards prompt concerns and the tool provides a range of strategies to address these issues.
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.