Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36908005›Full record

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

Design and implementation of the participatory German network for translational dementia care research (TaNDem): A mixed-method study on the perspectives of healthcare providers and dementia researchers in dementia care research.

Annelie Scharf, Anika Rädke, Daniel Purwins, Marie Marleen Heppner, Stefanie Köhler, Martina Roes, Stefan Teipel, Wolfgang Hoffmann, Bernhard Michalowsky

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
4.8field-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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Correlations between Dementia and Loneliness.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  4. Review
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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Annelie ScharfDeutsches Zentrum für Neurodegenerative Erkrankungen (DZNE), Rostock/Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0910-088X
Anika RädkeDeutsches Zentrum für Neurodegenerative Erkrankungen (DZNE), Rostock/Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
Daniel PurwinsDeutsches Zentrum für Neurodegenerative Erkrankungen (DZNE), Witten, Germany.
Marie Marleen HeppnerDeutsches Zentrum für Neurodegenerative Erkrankungen (DZNE), Witten, Germany.
Stefanie KöhlerDeutsches Zentrum für Neurodegenerative Erkrankungen (DZNE), Rostock/Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
Martina RoesDeutsches Zentrum für Neurodegenerative Erkrankungen (DZNE), Witten, Germany.
Stefan TeipelDeutsches Zentrum für Neurodegenerative Erkrankungen (DZNE), Rostock/Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
Wolfgang HoffmannDeutsches Zentrum für Neurodegenerative Erkrankungen (DZNE), Rostock/Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
Bernhard MichalowskyDeutsches Zentrum für Neurodegenerative Erkrankungen (DZNE), Rostock/Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases · DEWitten/Herdecke University · DEUniversitätsmedizin Greifswald · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrently, there is a lack of interaction between research and healthcare practice. As a result, research findings reach healthcare practice only late, and topics relevant to practice are often not known in research. Involving people living with dementia (PlwD), their relatives and healthcare providers in dementia care research can accelerate this process. For inclusion, firm and reliable structures are needed, which are to be established with the help of the Translational Network for Dementia Care Research in Germany. However, there is only limited knowledge about the priorities, expectations and conditions of stakeholders (healthcare providers and dementia researchers) for such cooperation within a network.

objectivesThe aim is to gather stakeholders' views on (i) future research topics to be addressed within the dementia care research network, (ii) the nature of collaboration within the network and (iii) the facilitating and hindering factors for establishing such a network.

methodsWithin an exploratory sequential mixed-method study, we interviewed 87 stakeholders within eleven semistructured focus group interviews. The interviews were transcribed, pseudonymized and analyzed using qualitative content analysis. The qualitative data were analyzed with MAXQDA. Based on the qualitative results found in the focus group interviews, a supplementary online questionnaire was developed to prioritise and rank these findings afterwards.

resultsStakeholders prioritized a comprehensible transfer of research results into practice, increased involvement of PlwD and their relatives (additionally marginalized groups such as people with a migrant background) in research and exchange between researchers. Cooperation should preferably occur in a regional context with local contacts, and the latest research results should be made available via an online database. The stakeholders' time, finances and human resources should be considered.

conclusionStakeholders have partly similar preferences and goals for cooperation and involvement, emphasizing that such interaction in a network offers the possibility of long-term, effective collaboration and added value for practice and research. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: For this study, dementia healthcare providers and dementia care researchers were asked about their perspectives. Their involvement is further elucidated in the manuscript text.

Indexed as

DementiaHealth PersonnelDelivery of Health CareFocus GroupsHumansQualitative ResearchTranslational Research, BiomedicalAlzheimer's diseasedementiadementia care researchnetworkparticipatory researchstakeholder involvement

Identifiers

PMID36908005
PMCPMC10154806
OpenAlexW4324020383

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.