Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31315416›Full record

ReviewAmerican journal of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias

Treatment Indications in Clinical Practice and Applied Research on Psychosocial Interventions for People With Dementia.

Kevin Charras, Moustapha Dramé

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in American journal of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Kevin CharrasPsychosocial Interventions Department & Training Center, Fondation Médéric Alzheimer, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0001-8798-9269
Moustapha DraméUniversity of the French West Indies, Faculty of Medicine, Martinique, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A recent review of Cochrane meta-analyses on psychosocial interventions (PIs) concludes that clinical trials fail to confirm PIs effective for all types of dementia at every stage of the disease. This article describes how and to what extent it is necessary to identify treatment indications when researching PIs and employing them in clinical practice. Twelve Cochrane reviews on PIs for people with dementia, selected because of their systematic methodology, were searched to identify outcomes related to treatment indications (dosage, type of dementia, severity…). The authors identified several research and practice issues that related to treatment indications: sample profiling, hypothesizing and statistical interpretation, external validity, effectiveness of interventions, contraindications and limits of interventions, and tailoring. Developing an effective PI requires empirical, developmental, exploratory, and confirmatory development stages to achieve credibility and robustness.

Indexed as

Data Interpretation, StatisticalDementiaResearch DesignHumansTreatment Outcomeclinical practicedementiaecopsychosocialevaluationpsychosocial interventionsresearchtreatment indications

Identifiers

PMID31315416
PMCPMC10623915

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.