Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34880025›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

Technology-based counselling in dementia (TeCoDem): study protocol of a mixed-methods systematic review with qualitative comparative analysis and meta-analysis.

Julian Hirt, Gero Langer, Fabian Wilde, Dorothee Bauernschmidt, Gabriele Meyer, Anja Bieber

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

6 authors.

Julian HirtInstitute of Health and Nursing Science, Medical Faculty, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6589-3936
Gero LangerInstitute of Health and Nursing Science, Medical Faculty, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany.
Fabian WildeInstitute of Health and Nursing Science, Medical Faculty, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany.
Dorothee BauernschmidtInstitute of Health and Nursing Science, Medical Faculty, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany.
Gabriele MeyerInstitute of Health and Nursing Science, Medical Faculty, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany.
Anja BieberInstitute of Health and Nursing Science, Medical Faculty, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany anja.bieber@medizin.uni-halle.de.ORCID 0000-0002-9506-2532

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionInformation technology can enhance timely and individual support for people with dementia and informal carers. There is some evidence that people with dementia and informal carers would benefit from technology-based counselling. However, it remains unclear which features of those interventions relate to beneficial outcomes and which aspects are necessary for a successful implementation. Therefore, the primary objectives are: (1) to identify conditions of successful implementation of technology-based counselling interventions in dementia and (2) to investigate the effectiveness of those interventions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a mixed-methods systematic review. The first primary objective requires evidence from various study designs addressing aspects on effective and non-effective implementation of technology-based counselling. This could be telephone-based, web-based or mobile-based interventions for people with dementia and informal carers. For the second primary objective, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) dealing with any outcomes will be included. Year of publication and language will not be restricted. We will search CINAHL, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Web of Science up to April 2021. Additionally, we will perform web searching and citation tracking. To achieve the first primary objective, a Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) will be conducted. The QCA enables us to identify necessary or sufficient components for a successful implementation. To reach the second primary objective, a meta-analysis will be performed with respect to potential clinical and statistical heterogeneity of RCTs. The revised Risk of Bias tool 2.0 will be used to check the risk of bias in RCTs. For all other study designs, the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool will be used. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required for this review. We will disseminate our findings through scientific and non-scientific journal articles and conference presentations as well as formats directed to the public and decision-makers in healthcare. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021245473.

Indexed as

CaregiversDementiaCounselingHumansMeta-Analysis as TopicReview Literature as TopicTechnologyTelephonedementiageriatric medicineinformation technology

Identifiers

PMID34880025
PMCPMC8655568

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.