ArticleBMC family practice2020
Acceptance and self-reported use of a dementia care toolbox by general practice personal: results from an intervention study in German practices.
Article in BMC family practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effects of the dementia care toolbox on personnel's self-reported confidence in patient care: a CRT in general practices.BMC family practice · 2021Trial
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
backgroundDementia is an age-related syndrome that is estimated to affect 46.8 million people worldwide (2015). In ageing populations, the prevalence of dementia is expected to increase. General practitioners (GPs) are often the first to be contacted when signs of dementia appear. This cluster-randomised trial (CRT) investigates the effects of a dementia care toolbox mailed to GP practices to facilitate dementia care. It contained patient brochures and posters for the waiting room in three languages, information cards for professionals and practical tools in three languages. The GPs' and practice assistants' (PrAs) use of and opinion about the toolbox is reported here.
methodsThree months after receiving the toolbox, participating GPs and PrAs were sent a standardised, self-administered questionnaire asking about the use and helpfulness of the various toolbox items by mail.
resultsA total of 50 GPs and PrAs (14 GPs and 36 PrAs) from 15 practices completed the questionnaire. Of the participants, 82.0% reported using at least one of the tools, while 18.0% had used none. In descending order, the patient brochures (70.0%), the information card (58.0%) and the poster (40.0%) were used. In general, the brochures (52.1%), the information card (44.9%) as well as the poster (28.6%) were perceived as helpful.
conclusionOverall, the dementia toolbox was widely accepted by both professional groups. Future research should investigate long-term effects of information strategies for GP practice settings.
trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register, DRKS00014632 . Registered 02 August 2018. Clinical register of the study coordination office of the University hospital of Bonn. Registered 05 September 2017.
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.