ArticleBMJ open2021
Protocol for a scoping review on the methods for engaging long-term care residents with dementia in research and guideline development.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPatient engagement is important when developing health guidelines to ensure high-quality and patient-centred recommendations. However, patient engagement in research and guideline development remains suboptimal, particularly for vulnerable populations, including residents with dementia living in long-term care (LTC) who are often not included in research and guideline development because of perceived and actual challenges with their health, memory, concentration and communication. Optimal strategies and methods for engaging LTC residents with dementia in research and guideline development remain unknown. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a scoping review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension to answer the research questions: (1) What methods have been used to engage LTC residents with dementia in research and guideline development? (2) What are the outcomes of resident engagement? (3) What are the barriers and facilitators to resident engagement? Systematic searches for peer-reviewed articles will be conducted in: Academic Search Premier (EBSCO), APA PsycINFO (EBSCO), CINAHL (EBSCO), Medline (OVID), Embase (Elsevier), Web of Science, and Cochrane Database and in grey literature. Two team members will screen articles and extract data. Results will be presented according to the research question they address. We will engage stakeholders including residents, family members, healthcare providers and representatives from relevant organisations throughout the study. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The scoping review will synthesise what is known about resident engagement in research and guideline development. It may identify gaps in the literature about the optimal methods to engage residents in performing research and developing guidelines and reveal opportunities for new methods. The results will be helpful for researchers and policy-makers seeking to develop guidelines and researchers engaging in topics that reflect the priorities and experiences of people with dementia. Results of the scoping review will be disseminated via publication in a peer-reviewed journal and conference presentations, and a one-page lay summary will be shared with our engaged stakeholders.
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.