Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30456289›Full record

ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2018

What do we know about strategies to manage dementia-related wandering? A scoping review.

Noelannah A Neubauer, Peyman Azad-Khaneghah, Antonio Miguel-Cruz, Lili Liu

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Noelannah A NeubauerDepartment of Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Peyman Azad-KhaneghahDepartment of Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Antonio Miguel-CruzDepartment of Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Lili LiuDepartment of Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
University of Alberta · CAUniversidad del Rosario · CO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Three of five persons with dementia will wander, raising concern as to how it can be managed effectively. Wander-management strategies comprise a range of interventions for different environments. Although technological interventions may help in the management of wandering, no review has exhaustively searched what types of high- and low-technological solutions are being used to reduce the risks of wandering. In this article, we perform a review of gray and scholarly literature that examines the range and extent of high- and low-tech strategies used to manage wandering behavior in persons with dementia. We conclude that although effectiveness of 49 interventions and usability of 13 interventions were clinically tested, most were evaluated in institutional or laboratory settings, few addressed ethical issues, and the overall level of scientific evidence from these outcomes was low. Based on this review, we provide guidelines and recommendations for future research in this field.

Indexed as

Aging in placeDementiaInterventionsReviewWandering

Identifiers

PMID30456289
PMCPMC6234917
OpenAlexW2889485963

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.