Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35938252›Full record

ArticleJournal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD2022

Dementia Risk Reduction in Primary Care: A Scoping Review of Clinical Guidelines Using a Behavioral Specificity Framework.

Kali Godbee, Lisa Guccione, Victoria J Palmer, Jane Gunn, Nicola Lautenschlager, Jill J Francis

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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.

Kali GodbeeDepartment of General Practice, Melbourne Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Lisa GuccioneDepartment of Health Services Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Victoria J PalmerDepartment of General Practice, Melbourne Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Jane GunnFaculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Nicola LautenschlagerAcademic Unit for Psychiatry of Old Age, Department of Psychiatry, Melbourne Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Jill J FrancisMelbourne School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrimary care practitioners are being called upon to work with their patients to reduce dementia risk. However, it is unclear who should do what with whom, when, and under what circumstances.

objectiveThis scoping review aimed to identify clinical guidelines for dementia risk reduction (DRR) in primary care settings, synthesize the guidelines into actionable behaviors, and appraise the guidelines for specificity.

methodsTerms related to "dementia", "guidelines", and "risk reduction" were entered into two academic databases and two web search engines. Guidelines were included if they referred specifically to clinical practices for healthcare professionals for primary prevention of dementia. Included guidelines were analyzed using a directed content analysis method, underpinned by the Action-Actor-Context-Target-Time framework for specifying behavior.

resultsEighteen guidelines were included in the analysis. Together, the guidelines recommended six distinct clusters of actions for DRR. These were to 1) invite patients to discuss DRR, 2) identify patients with risk factors for dementia, 3) discuss DRR, 4) manage dementia risk factors, 5) signpost to additional support, and 6) follow up. Guidelines recommended various actors, contexts, targets, and times for performing these actions. Together, guidelines lacked specificity and were at times contradictory.

conclusionCurrently available guidelines allow various approaches to promoting DRR in primary care. Primary care teams are advised to draw on the results of the review to decide which actions to undertake and the locally appropriate actors, contexts, targets, and times for these actions. Documenting these decisions in more specific, local guidelines for promoting DRR should facilitate implementation.

Indexed as

DementiaHealth ServicesPrimary Health CareRisk Reduction BehaviorHealth PersonnelHumansResearch Design

Identifiers

PMID35938252
PMCPMC9697048

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.