Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33771131›Full record

SynthesisBMC medical ethics2021

The full spectrum of ethical issues in dementia research: findings of a systematic qualitative review.

Tim G Götzelmann, Daniel Strech, Hannes Kahrass

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medical ethics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Emotional Labor in Dementia Research.Qualitative health research · 2026
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Portable Accessible MRI in Dementia Research: Ethical Considerations About Research Representation and Dementia-Friendly Technology.The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

3 authors.

Tim G Götzelmann *Institute for History, Ethics and Philosophy in Medicine, OE 5450, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany. tim@goetzelmann.info.ORCID 0000-0001-6998-0850
Daniel StrechQUEST Center, Berlin Institute of Health, Anna-Louisa-Karsch-Straße 2, 10178, Berlin, Germany.
Hannes Kahrass *Institute for History, Ethics and Philosophy in Medicine, OE 5450, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhen including participants with dementia in research, various ethical issues arise. At present, there are only a few existing dementia-specific research guidelines (Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use in Clinical investigation of medicines for the treatment Alzheimer's disease (Internet). https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/clinical-investigation-medicines-treatment-alzheimers-disease ; Food and Drug Administration, Early Alzheimer's Disease: Developing Drugs for Treatment Guidance for Industry [Internet]. http://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/alzheimers-disease-developing-drugs-treatment-guidance-industy ), necessitating a more systematic and comprehensive approach to this topic to help researchers and stakeholders address dementia-specific ethical issues in research. A systematic literature review provides information on the ethical issues in dementia-related research and might therefore serve as a basis to improve the ethical conduct of this research. This systematic review aims to provide a broad and unbiased overview of ethical issues in dementia research by reviewing, analysing, and coding the latest literature on the topic.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review in PubMed and Google Scholar (publications in English between 2007 and 2020, no restrictions on the type of publication) of literature on research ethics in dementia research. Ethical issues in research were identified by qualitative text analysis and normative analysis.

resultsThe literature review retrieved 110 references that together mentioned 105 ethical issues in dementia research. This set of ethical issues was structured into a matrix based on the eight major principles from a pre-existing framework on biomedical ethics (Emanuel et al. An Ethical Framework for Biomedical Research. in The Oxford textbook of clinical research ethics, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2008). Consequently, subcategories were created and further categorized into dementia stages and study phases.

conclusionsThe systematically derived matrix helps raise awareness and understanding of the complex topic of ethical issues in dementia research. The matrix can be used as a basis for researchers, policy makers and other stakeholders when planning, conducting and monitoring research, making decisions on the legal background of the topic, and creating research practice guidelines.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchDementiaEthics, ResearchHumansDementiaDementia researchEthicsMedical ethicsResearch ethics

Identifiers

PMID33771131
PMCPMC8004446

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.