ArticleInternet interventions2018
The development and evaluation of an online dementia resource for primary care based health professionals.
Article in Internet interventions, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dementia-related primary care training needs: a qualitative study.Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria · 2025Article
- Development and Evaluation of a Clinician-Vetted Dementia Caregiver Resources Website: Mixed Methods Approach.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- On the advantages and disadvantages of virtual continuing medical education: a scoping review.Canadian medical education journal · 2023Article
- Intermediate care in caring for dementia, the point of view of general practitioners: A key informant survey across Europe.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Clinicians' Perspectives on Barriers and Enablers of Optimal Prescribing in Patients with Dementia and Coexisting Conditions.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFMArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrimary care based health professionals struggle with many aspects of dementia care. General practitioners (GPs) find providing post-diagnosis information on services and supports particularly challenging. Likewise, people with dementia and their family caregivers feel they need more support from their GPs in this post-diagnosis period.
objectiveThis study aimed to develop and evaluate an online educational resource for primary care health professionals that included a dementia specific services and supports directory.
methodA previously conducted educational needs analysis informed the content of the resource. This content was further developed by a review of the literature and through consultation with an expert reference group and a stakeholder group. A mixed method approach was taken to the evaluation of the online resource which included analysis of the website traffic, qualitative feedback from stakeholders and evaluation by general practitioners.
resultsThe online resource www.dementiapathways.ie was developed. Initial qualitative feedback obtained from potential end-users was positive. Data analysis was performed on over 4000 people who accessed the site. Finally, the online resource was demonstrated to 190 general practitioners in 36 workshops. All of the general practitioners surveyed felt that dementipathways.ie would be a useful resource for them. Several potential barriers to the successful development and implementation of a services and supports directory were identified.
conclusionThis study provides a prototype for the development of an online dementia educational resource and demonstrates the value of a dementia-specific services and supports directory for primary care based health professionals.
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.