Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29886439›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2018

Shared decision-making for people living with dementia in extended care settings: a systematic review.

Rachel Louise Daly, Frances Bunn, Claire Goodman

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

57 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. A decision aid to support family carers of people living with dementia towards the end-of-life: Coproduction process, outcome and reflections.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Nurse Practitioners' Experiences Navigating Treatment Decision-Making Affecting Older People with Neurocognitive Disorders and Cancer.The Canadian journal of nursing research = Revue canadienne de recherche en sciences infirmieres · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. A New Process Model for Relationship-Centred Shared Decision-Making in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Settings.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Rachel Louise DalyCentre for Research in Primary and Community Care (CRIPACC), University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6048-3820
Frances BunnCentre for Research in Primary and Community Care (CRIPACC), University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK.
Claire GoodmanCentre for Research in Primary and Community Care (CRIPACC), University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK.

Funding

Department of Health 11/1021/02Department of Health HS&DR/15/77/25Department of Health HTA/12/192/10Department of Health HTA/13/75/01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundShared decision-making is recognised as an important element of person-centred dementia care.

objectivesThe aim of this review was to explore how people living with dementia and cognitive impairment can be included in day-to-day decisions about their health and care in extended care settings.

designA systematic review including primary research relating to shared decision-making, with cognitively impaired adults in (or transferrable to) extended care settings. Databases searched were: CINAHL, PubMed, the Cochrane Library, NICE Evidence, OpenGrey, Autism Data, Google Scholar, Scopus and Medicines Complete (June to October 2016 and updated 2018) for studies published in the last 20 years.

resultsOf the 19 included studies 15 involved people with living dementia, seven in extended care settings. People living with cognitive impairment often have the desire and ability to participate in decision-making about their everyday care, although this is regularly underestimated by their staff and family care partners. Shared decision-making has the potential to improve quality of life for both the person living with dementia and those who support them. How resources to support shared decision-making are implemented in extended care settings is less well understood.

conclusionsEvidence suggests that people living with cognitive impairment value opportunities to be involved in everyday decision-making about their care. How these opportunities are created, understood, supported and sustained in extended care settings remains to be determined. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42016035919.

Indexed as

Decision MakingCaregiversCognitive DysfunctionDementiaFemaleHumansLong-Term CareMalePatient-Centered CareCare HomesCognitive ImpairmentDay-to-Day CareDementiaEveryday CareExtended CareResidential CareShared Decision-Making

Identifiers

PMID29886439
PMCPMC6009462

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.