ArticleDementia & neuropsychologia
Distinct attitudes of professionals from different medical specialties toward autonomy and legal instruments in the assessment of patients with Alzheimer's disease.
Article in Dementia & neuropsychologia. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The evaluation of competence of Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients to assume personal or collective responsibilities and the resulting legal implications is a relevant issue.
objectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the attitudes of different medical specialists towards the disability of patients with Alzheimer's disease and practitioners' competence to interfere with decision-making autonomy.
methodsProfessionals from different areas (Neurology, Psychiatry, Geriatrics, and General Practice) were interviewed by one of the authors, after being presented a fictitious clinical case which raised several topics, namely:[1] Critical judgment and capacity of the patient to take decisions related to daily activities;[2] The role of family physicians in nominating trustees and caregivers.
resultsAnswers to the first question did not differ regarding degree of preservation of awareness but at least 25% stressed that the patient must be carefully listened to, independent of caregiver or legal representative opinion. There were significant knowledge gaps in responses to the second question. Half of the physicians interviewed did not have adequate information about the legal aspects of caring for patients with Alzheimer's disease.
conclusionsLegal aspects is a topic that must be incorporated into professional training in order to improve attitudes toward the long-term management of patients with dementia.
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.