ReviewJournal of the American Geriatrics Society2021
Resources, methods, and data infrastructure to promote research in dementia care, caregiving, and services.
Review in Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2021. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe National Institute on Aging, in conjunction with the Department of Health and Human Services as part of the National Alzheimer's Project Act, hosted a 2020 Dementia Care, Caregiving, and Services Research Summit Virtual Meeting Series on August 13, 2020. This article reflects three presentations related to Theme 6: Research Resources, Methods, and Data Infrastructure. Dr. Bynum discussed the challenges of identifying people for population- and healthcare-based research, including how definitions of dementia have changed over time, the opportunities and challenges inherent in the use of electronic data sources, and the need to fit data collection strategies to research goals and questions. Dr. Travison provided an overview on the growing use of embedded pragmatic clinical trials (ePCTs) and how to enhance their impact in dementia research. Dr. Wendler presented on the ethical considerations relevant to consent for dementia research, including assessment of decisional capacity and the role of decisional surrogates.
conclusionsThe availability of claims data, electronic health records, and other sources of "existing" data has made the use and development of ePCTs both easier and more appealing. Among other things, they offer advantages in terms of lower cost and generalizability to real-world settings. This is turn has necessitated the use of informatic and analytic approaches to account for some of the limitations and complexities of such data, including multilevel clustering and the need to link and jointly analyze data from the person with dementia and those of their care partner. As part of this process, it will be important to broaden the scope of who is assessed for decisional capacity, make those assessments more study specific, and assist surrogates in making decisions based on what the individual would have chosen for themselves if capacitated (i.e., substituted judgment).
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.