ArticleBMJ open2021
Assessing preferences for leisure activities of people receiving adult day services: a study protocol for concept mapping and psychometric testing.
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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploration of the Content and Structure of Preferences for Leisure Activities of People Receiving Adult Day Services Using Concept Mapping.The Gerontologist · 2024Article
- Consulting concepts and structures for people with dementia in Germany: a protocol for a 'grey-shaded' scoping review.BMJ open · 2022Article
- "This is Slowly Becoming my Interest…": The Understanding of Leisure and Preferences for Leisure Activities of People Receiving Adult Day Services.Research on agingArticle
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 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLeisure activities appear to be an important factor in maintaining and improving health in old age. To better understand what people want to do when visiting an adult day service (ADS), it is important to systematically assess their preferences. Currently, there is no instrument for assessing preferences for leisure activities for people receiving ADS. Accordingly, the planned study aims to develop or modify and psychometrically test an instrument to assess leisure activities preferences for use with people receiving ADS. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A mixed-method design with a participatory research approach was chosen for this study (Preferences for Everyday Living-Deutschland, PELI-D II). In the first step of this study, leisure activities will be identified on the basis of an evidence map. In the second step, the results from the evidence map will be empirically supplemented, and leisure activities will be categorised and prioritised within a concept mapping approach by people who receive ADS. Subsequently, based on this categorisation, either an instrument that was piloted in a previous study (PELI-D I) will be modified or an instrument with a focus on preferences for leisure activities in ADS will be explored. In the last step of this study, the instrument will be psychometrically tested. Data will be analysed via content analysis as well as descriptive and inferential statistics and statistical tests. The results will be presented in various tables and graphs (eg, pattern matching). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the ethics committee of the Witten/Herdecke University (application number 226/2020). The results will be made available to the public at (inter)national conferences, in peer-reviewed articles and in articles for practitioners.
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.