ArticleBMJ open2022
Co-designing an intervention to increase uptake of advance care planning in later life following emergency hospitalisation: a research protocol using accelerated experience-based co-design (AEBCD) and the behaviour change wheel (BCW).
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Experiences with implementing advance care planning (ACP-GP) in Belgian general practice in the context of a cluster RCT: a process evaluation using the RE-AIM framework.BMC primary care · 2024Trial
- Article
- The Development of the Dance Smart Intervention: A Céilí Dance Exercise Intervention for People Living With Dementia and Their Care Partners (Dance Smart Intervention).Dementia (London, England) · 2026Article
- Assessing unstated assumptions of patient and public involvement in palliative care with story completion and typology analysis.BMC palliative care · 2026Article
- Article
- A model for the uptake of advance care planning in older cancer adults: a scoping review.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionDespite the potential benefits of advance care planning, uptake in older adults is low. In general, there is a lack of guidance as to how to initiate advance care planning conversations and encourage individuals to take action in planning their future care, including after emergency hospitalisation. Participatory action research methods are harnessed in health services research to design interventions that are relevant to end-users and stakeholders. This study aims to involve older persons, carers and healthcare professionals in co-designing an intervention to increase uptake of advance care planning in later life, which can be used by social contacts and healthcare professionals, particularly in the context of a recent emergency hospitalisation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The theory-driven participatory design research method integrates and adapts accelerated experience-based co-design with the behaviour change wheel, in the form of a collaborative multi-stakeholder co-design workshop. In total, 12 participants, comprising 4 lay persons aged 70+, 4 carers and 4 healthcare professionals with experience in elder care, will be recruited to participate in two online half-day sessions, together comprising one online workshop. There will be a maximum of two workshops. First, in the discovery phase, participants will reflect on findings from earlier qualitative research on views and experiences of advance care planning from three workstreams: patients, carers and healthcare professionals. Second, in the co-design phase, participants will explore practical mechanisms in which older persons aged 70+ can be encouraged to adopt advance care planning behaviours based on the behaviour change wheel, in order to co-design a behavioural intervention to increase uptake of advance care planning in older adults after an emergency hospitalisation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been obtained from the Science Engineering Technology Research Ethics Committee at Imperial College London (Reference: 19IC5538). The findings from this study will be disseminated through publications, conferences and meetings.
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.