Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36647692›Full record

SynthesisHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2023

Co-design development of a decision guide on eating and drinking for people with severe dementia during acute hospital admissions.

Kanthee Anantapong, Andrea Bruun, Anne Walford, Christina H Smith, Jill Manthorpe, Elizabeth L Sampson, Nathan Davies

Open access · goldFull text readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Co-design development of a decision guide on eating and drinking for people with severe dementia during acute hospital admissions.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Evaluating the Co-Design and Implementation of a Multicomponent Intervention to Improve Communication in Aged Care: A Nested Process Evaluation Protocol.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Co-designing resources to support older people with intellectual disabilities and their families plan for parental death and transitions in care.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

7 authors at 7 institutions in 3 countries.

Kanthee AnantapongMarie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3190-4355
Andrea BruunMarie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9620-0290
Anne WalfordFamily Carer, Patient and Public Involvement Panel, London, UK.
Christina H SmithLanguage and Cognition, Division of Psychology and Language Sciences, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7803-9616
Jill ManthorpeNIHR Policy Research Unit in Health & Social Care Workforce, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9006-1410
Elizabeth L SampsonMarie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8929-7362
Nathan DaviesMarie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7757-5353
East London NHS Foundation Trust · GBKing's College London · GBKingston University · GBLanguage Science (South Korea) · KRPrince of Songkla University · THUniversity College London · GBVirgin Care · GB

Funding

Marie Curie MCCC-FCO-11-UMarie Curie MCRGS-20171219-8004
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionUsing co-design processes, we aimed to develop an evidence-based decision guide for family carers and hospital professionals to support decision-making about eating and drinking for hospital patients with severe dementia.

methodsFollowing a systematic review, we interviewed people with mild dementia, family carers and hospital professionals in England. We then held co-design workshops with family carers and hospital professionals. In parallel with the workshops, we used a matrix to synthesize data from all studies and to develop a decision guide prototype. The prototype was iteratively refined through further co-design workshops and discussions among researchers and Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) representatives. We conducted user testing for final feedback and to finalize the decision guide.

resultsMost participants acknowledged the limited benefits of tube feeding and would not use or want it for someone with severe dementia. However, they found decision-making processes and communication about nutrition and hydration were emotionally demanding and poorly supported in acute hospitals. The co-design groups developed the aims of the decision guide to support conversations and shared decision-making processes in acute hospitals, and help people reach evidence-based decisions. It was designed to clarify decision-making stages, provide information and elicit the values/preferences of everyone involved. It encouraged person-centred care, best-interests decision-making and multidisciplinary team working. From user testing, family carers and hospital professionals thought the decision guide could help initiate conversations and inform decisions. The final decision guide was disseminated and is being used in clinical practice in England.

conclusionWe used rigorous and transparent processes to co-design the decision guide with everyone involved. The decision guide may facilitate conversations about nutrition and hydration and help people reach shared decisions that meet the needs and preferences of people with severe dementia. Future evaluation is required to test its real-world impacts. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: People with mild dementia, family carers and hospital professionals contributed to the design of the decision guide through the interviews and co-design workshops. PPI members helped design study procedures and materials and prepare this manuscript.

Indexed as

DementiaCaregiversEnglandHospitalsHumanscarersco-designdecision aiddementiahospital carehydrationnutrition

Identifiers

PMID36647692
PMCPMC10010093
OpenAlexW4316673000

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read5
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.