Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31986964›Full record

ArticleNursing ethics2020

Home-dwelling persons with dementia's perception on care support: Qualitative study.

Stein Erik Fæø, Frøydis Kristine Bruvik, Oscar Tranvåg, Bettina S Husebo

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nursing ethics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04043364 (LIVE@Home.Path), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 3 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.

NCT04043364 naunknown statusnot on this map

LIVE@Home.Path: a Mixed Method, Stepped Wedge and Randomized Controlled Trial Innovating the Clinical Pathway for Home-dwelling Persons With Dementia and Their Families

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of BergenRan2019 to 2023Enrolled280ConditionsDementia, Home-dwelling, CaregiverArmsLIVE
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Burden and care time for dementia caregivers in the LIVE@Home.Path trial.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025
    Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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.

Stein Erik FæøUniversity of Bergen, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7514-0444
Frøydis Kristine BruvikUniversity of Bergen, Norway.
Oscar TranvågUniversity of Bergen, Norway; Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Norway; Oslo University Hospital, Norway.
Bettina S HuseboUniversity of Bergen, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOver the last years, there has been a growth in care solutions aiming to support home-dwelling persons with dementia. Assistive technology and voluntarism have emerged as supplements to traditional homecare and daycare centers. However, patient participation is often lacking in decision-making processes, undermining ethical principles and basic human rights. RESEARCH

objectiveThis study explores the perceptions of persons with dementia toward assistive technology, volunteer support, homecare services, and daycare centers. RESEARCH

designA hermeneutical approach was chosen for this study, using a semi-structured interview guide to allow for interviews in the form of open conversations. PARTICIPANTS AND RESEARCH CONTEXT: Twelve home-dwelling persons with dementia participated in the study. The participants were recruited through municipal daycare centers. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: Interviews were facilitated within a safe environment, carefully conducted to safeguard the participants' integrity. The Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics, Western Norway (Project number 2016/1630) approved the study.

findingsThe participants shared a well of reflections on experience and attitudes toward the aspects explored. They described assistive technology as possibly beneficial, but pointed to several non-beneficial side effects. Likewise, they were hesitant toward volunteer support, depending on how this might fit their individual preferences. Homecare services were perceived as a necessary means of care, its benefits ascribed to a variety of aspects. Similarly, the participants' assessments of daycare centers relied on specific aspects, with high individual variety. DISCUSSION AND

conclusionThe study indicates that the margins between whether these specific care interventions were perceived as supportive or infringing may be small and details may have great effect on the persons' everyday life. This indicates that patient participation in decision-making processes for this group is-in addition to be a judicial and ethical requirement-crucial to ensure adequate care and support.

Indexed as

Adult Day Care CentersAgedAged, 80 and overDementiaFemaleHome Care ServicesHumansMaleNorwayPatient ParticipationQualitative ResearchSelf-Help DevicesVolunteersAssistive technologycare supportdecision makingdementiaethicshermeneuticspatient participationvolunteer support

Identifiers

PMID31986964
PMCPMC7323742

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.