Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34763796›Full record

ReviewThe Psychiatric clinics of North America2021

Reconsidering Gold Standards for Surrogate Decision Making for People with Dementia.

James M Wilkins

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Psychiatric clinics of North America, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

1 author.

James M WilkinsDivision of Geriatric Psychiatry, McLean Hospital, 115 Mill Street, Belmont, MA 02478, USA; Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA. Electronic address: jwilkins1@partners.org.

Funding

NIA NIH HHS L30 AG060475
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As dementia progresses and cognitive function declines, surrogate decision making becomes increasingly prevalent. By convention, there is a hierarchical approach to proxy decision making beginning with known wishes, followed by a substituted judgment standard, and then a best-interests standard. For people with dementia, discrepancy in proxy assessments is common and associated with negative behavioral outcomes. Therefore, optimal approaches to proxy decision making for people with dementia should instead prioritize and implement options that encourage direct participation of persons with dementia and standards that explicitly rely on consideration of longitudinal changes in values and preferences for persons with dementia.

Indexed as

Decision MakingDementiaHumansJudgmentProxyCapacityDementiaGeriatric psychiatrySurrogate decision making

Identifiers

PMID34763796
PMCPMC8597910

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.