Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37259070›Full record

ArticleBMC geriatrics2023

Shifting the narrative from living at risk to living with risk: validating and pilot-testing a clinical decision support tool: a mixed methods study.

Heather MacLeod, Nathalie Veillette, Jennifer Klein, Nathalie Delli-Colli, Mary Egan, Dominique Giroux, Marie-Jeanne Kergoat, Shaen Gingrich, Véronique Provencher

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC geriatrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

9 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Heather MacLeodRegional Geriatric Program of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Nathalie VeilletteSchool of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Jennifer KleinGlenrose Rehabilitation Hospital, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Nathalie Delli-ColliSchool of Social Work, Faculty of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada.
Mary EganSchool of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Dominique GirouxDepartment of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, Québec City, QC, Canada.
Marie-Jeanne KergoatInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal (IUGM) Research Center, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Shaen GingrichNorth East Specialized Geriatric Centre, Sudbury, ON, Canada.
Véronique ProvencherResearch Centre on Aging, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada. veronique.provencher@usherbrooke.ca.
Institut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal · CAUniversité de Sherbrooke · CAGlenrose Rehabilitation Hospital · CAInstitute of Aging · CANortheast Cancer Centre · CAUniversity of Ottawa · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhen there are safety concerns, healthcare professionals (HCPs) may disregard older adults' wishes to return or remain at home. A paradigm shift is needed for HCPs to move from labelling older adults as living at risk to helping them live with risk. The Living with Risk: Decision Support Tool (LwR:DST) was developed to support older adults and HCPs with difficult decision-making regarding living with risk. The study objectives were to: (1) validate, and (2) pilot-test the LwR:DST in hospital and community settings.

methodsThe study was conducted across Canada during the pandemic. The LwR:DST's content was validated with quantitative and qualitative data by: (1) 71 HCPs from hospital and community settings using the Delphi method, and (2) 17 older adults and caregivers using focus groups. HCPs provided feedback on the LwR:DST's content, format and instruction manual while older adults provided feedback on the LwR:DST's communication step. The revised LwR:DST was pilot-tested by 14 HCPs in one hospital and one community setting, and 17 older adults and caregivers described their experience of HCPs using this approach with them. Descriptive and thematic analysis were performed.

resultsThe LwR:DST underwent two iterations incorporating qualitative and quantitative data provided by HCPs, older adults and caregivers. The quantitative Delphi method data validated the content and the process of the LwR:DST, while the qualitative data provided practical improvements. The pilot-testing results suggest that using the LwR:DST broadens HCPs' clinical thinking, structures their decision-making, improves their communication and increases their competence and comfort with risk assessment and management. Our findings also suggest that the LwR:DST improves older adults' healthcare experience by feeling heard, understood and involved.

conclusionsThis revised LwR:DST should help HCPs systematically identify frail older adults' risks when they remain at or return home and find acceptable ways to mitigate these risks. The LwR:DST induces a paradigm shift by acknowledging that risks are inherent in everyday living and that risk-taking has positive and negative consequences. The challenges involved in integrating the LwR:DST into practice, i.e., when, how and with whom to use it, will be addressed in future research.

Indexed as

Decision Support Systems, ClinicalAgedCanadaCaregiversFocus GroupsHealth PersonnelHumansQualitative ResearchClinical decision-makingDelphiOlder adultRisk assessmentRisk managementRisk-takingValidation

Identifiers

PMID37259070
PMCPMC10230481
OpenAlexW4378903257

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.