Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31072861›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Reducing complexity of patient decision aids for community-based older adults with dementia and their caregivers: multiple case study of Decision Boxes.

Gabriel Bilodeau, Holly Witteman, France Légaré, Juliette Lafontaine-Bruneau, Philippe Voyer, Edeltraut Kröger, Marie-Claude Tremblay, Anik M C Giguere

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Family Carer Involvement in Dementia Care Research: A Scoping Review and Expert Consultation.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

8 authors.

Gabriel BilodeauLaval University Research Centre on Primary Care and Services, Centre integre universitaire de sante et de services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.
Holly WittemanLaval University, Family and Emergency Medicine, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.
France LégaréKnowledge Transfer and Health Technology Assessment Research Group, Research Center of Centre hospitalier universitaire de Québec (CRCHUQ), Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.
Juliette Lafontaine-BruneauCaregiver partner, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.
Philippe VoyerFaculte des Sciences Infirmieres de l'Universite Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.
Edeltraut KrögerLaval University Research Center on Primary Care and Services, Centre integre universitaire de sante et de services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.
Marie-Claude TremblayLaval University Research Centre on Primary Care and Services, Centre integre universitaire de sante et de services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.
Anik M C GiguereLaval University Research Centre on Primary Care and Services, Centre integre universitaire de sante et de services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo identify patient decision aids' features to limit their complexity for older adults with dementia and their family caregivers.

designMixed method, multiple case study within a user-centred design (UCD) approach.

settingCommunity-based healthcare in the province of Quebec in Canada.

participants23 older persons (aged 65+ years) with dementia and their 27 family caregivers.

resultsDuring three UCD evaluation-modification rounds, participants identified strengths and weaknesses of the patient decision aids' content and visual design that influenced their complexity. Weaknesses of content included a lack of understanding of the decision aids' purpose and target audience, missing information, irrelevant content and issues with terminology and sentence structure. Weaknesses of visual design included critics about the decision aids' general layout (density, length, navigation) and their lack of pictures. In response, the design team implemented a series of practical features and design strategies, comprising: a clear expression of the patient decision aids' purpose through simple text, picture and personal stories; systematic and frequent use of pictograms illustrating key points and helping structure patient decision aids' general layout; a glossary; removal of scientific references from the main document; personal stories to clarify more difficult concepts; a contact section to facilitate implementation of the selected option; GRADE ratings to convey the quality of the evidence; a values clarification exercise formatted as a checklist and presented at the beginning of the document to streamline navigation; involvement of a panel of patient/caregiver partners to guide expression of patient priorities; editing of the text to a sixth grade reading level; UCD process to optimise comprehensiveness and relevance of content and training of patients/caregivers in shared decision-making.

conclusionsThe revised template for patient decision aids is designed to meet the needs of adults living with dementia and their caregivers better, which may translate into fewer evaluation-modification rounds.

Indexed as

Decision MakingDecision Support TechniquesHealth LiteracyAgedAged, 80 and overCaregiversDementiaFemaleHumansIndependent LivingInterviews as TopicMalePatient ParticipationQualitative Researchagingcommunication and information technologydementiahealth services researchprimary careshared decision making

Identifiers

PMID31072861
PMCPMC6528048

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.