Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29166898›Full record

SynthesisBMC health services research2017

Stakeholders perspectives on the key components of community-based interventions coordinating care in dementia: a qualitative systematic review.

Amy Backhouse, David A Richards, Rose McCabe, Ross Watkins, Chris Dickens

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC health services research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Effectiveness of different post-diagnostic dementia care models delivered by primary care: a systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Amy BackhouseUniversity of Exeter Medical School, College House, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK. A.Backhouse@exeter.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7356-0525
David A RichardsUniversity of Exeter Medical School, College House, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
Rose McCabeUniversity of Exeter Medical School, College House, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
Ross WatkinsUniversity of Exeter Medical School, College House, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
Chris DickensUniversity of Exeter Medical School, College House, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.
University of Exeter · GB

Funding

Department of Health PB-PG-1111-26063
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInterventions aiming to coordinate services for the community-based dementia population vary in components, organisation and implementation. In this review we aimed to investigate the views of stakeholders on the key components of community-based interventions coordinating care in dementia.

methodsWe searched four databases from inception to June 2015; Medline, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE and PsycINFO, this was aided by a search of four grey literature databases, and backward and forward citation tracking of included papers. Title and abstract screening was followed by a full text screen by two independent reviewers, and quality was assessed using the CASP appraisal tool. We then conducted thematic synthesis on extracted data.

resultsA total of seven papers from five independent studies were included in the review, and encompassed the views of over 100 participants from three countries. Through thematic synthesis we identified 32 initial codes that were grouped into 5 second-order themes: (1) case manager had four associated codes and described preferences for the case manager personal and professional attributes, including a sound knowledge in dementia and availability of local services; (2) communication had five associated codes and emphasized the importance stakeholders placed on multichannel communication with service users, as well as between multidisciplinary teams and across organisations; (3) intervention had 11 associated codes which focused primarily on the practicalities of implementation such as the contact type and frequency between case managers and service users, and the importance of case manager training and service evaluation; (4) resources had five associated codes which outlined stakeholder views on the required resources for coordinating interventions and potential overlap with existing resources, as well as arising issues when available resources do not meet those required for successful implementation; and (5) support had seven associated codes that reflect the importance that was placed on the support network around the case manager and the investment of professionals involved directly in care as well as the wider professional network.

conclusionThe synthesis of relevant qualitative studies has shown how various stakeholder groups considered dementia care coordination interventions to be acceptable, useful and appropriate for dementia care, and have clear preferences for components, implementation methods and settings of these interventions. By incorporating stakeholders' perspectives and preferences when planning and developing coordinating interventions we may increase the likelihood of successful implementation and patient benefits.

Indexed as

Patient Care PlanningCase ManagementCommunicationCommunity NetworksDementiaHumansQualitative ResearchCase managementCollaborative careCommunity interventionsDementiaDementia care coordinationHealth servicesQualitative researchSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID29166898
PMCPMC5700484
OpenAlexW2768507585

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.