Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34934309›Full record

ReviewPatient preference and adherence2021

Priorities and Preferences of People Living with Dementia or Cognitive Impairment - A Systematic Review.

Hannah Wehrmann, Bernhard Michalowsky, Simon Lepper, Wiebke Mohr, Anika Raedke, Wolfgang Hoffmann

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Patient preference and adherence, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Impact of dementia-landscaped therapy garden on psychological well-being- A pilot study.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Hannah WehrmannTranslational Health Care Research, German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE) Site Rostock/Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
Bernhard MichalowskyTranslational Health Care Research, German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE) Site Rostock/Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3425-0089
Simon LepperTranslational Health Care Research, German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE) Site Rostock/Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
Wiebke MohrTranslational Health Care Research, German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE) Site Rostock/Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
Anika RaedkeTranslational Health Care Research, German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE) Site Rostock/Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
Wolfgang HoffmannTranslational Health Care Research, German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE) Site Rostock/Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundKnowledge about the priorities and preferences of people living with dementia (PwD) might help to individualize treatment, care, and support, which could improve patient-related outcomes. This study aimed to summarize preferences of PwD or people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), considering all relevant aspects of health care and everyday life.

methodsWe conducted a systematic literature review and included studies about patient preferences published in English between January 1, 1990 and October 28, 2019. The inclusion criteria were that preferences were elicited directly by PwD or patients with MCI. We used the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Management value set for dementia to categorize the preferences into the following topics: a) clinical status, b) symptoms, functioning, and quality of life, and c) sustainability of care.

resultsOf 578 initially identified studies, 45 met the inclusion criteria. Patients preferred to be informed about the diagnosis as early as possible, especially for anticipatory care planning. They ranked caregiver quality of life as their highest priority. They preferred not to be a burden to others more than their caregivers' mood, their own functional status, or their own distressing behaviors. Furthermore, PwD are eager to participate in medical decisions, especially in those about creating an everyday life routine. PwD preferred their own quality of life, self-efficacy, and emotional well-being. Institutionalized PwD preferred individualized and person-centered care. According to the sustainability of care, PwD preferred to maintain close bonds with their family at the end of their life and wanted to be treated with empathy.

conclusionThis systematic review provides essential insights into cognitively impaired patients' preferences, which are rarely considered in treatment, care, and support services. Further studies should evaluate whether considering preferences in treatment and care or daily living can improve patient-reported outcomes.

Indexed as

decision-makingdementiapatient outcome assessmentpatient preference

Identifiers

PMID34934309
PMCPMC8684431

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.