ArticleScandinavian journal of primary health care2024
General practitioners' role in safeguarding patients with dementia in their use of dietary supplements. A qualitative study.
Article in Scandinavian journal of primary health care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Use of dietary supplements by individuals with dementia - the caregivers' perspective.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe use of dietary supplements (DS) may cause harm through direct and indirect effects. Patients with dementia may be particularly vulnerable. This study aims to explore general practitioners' (GPs') experiences with DS use by these patients, the GPs perceived responsibilities, obstacles in taking on this responsibility, their attitudes toward DS, and suggestions for improvements to safeguard the use of DS in this patient group.
designQualitative individual interview study conducted February - December 2019. Data were analysed using systematic text condensation.
settingPrimary healthcare clinics in Norway. SUBJECTS: Fourteen Norwegian GPs.
findingsNone of the informants were dismissive of patients using DS. They were aware of the possible direct risks and had observed them in patients. Most GPs showed little awareness of potential indirect risks to patients with dementia who use DS. They acknowledged the need for caretaking of these patients. Although there were differences in practice styles, most of the GPs wished to help their patients safeguarding DS use but found it difficult due to the lack of quality assurance of product information. Furthermore, there were no effective ways for the GPs to document DS use in the patients' records. Several suggestions for improvement were given by the GPs, such as increased attention from GPs, inclusion of DS in the prescription software, and stricter regulatory systems for DS from the authorities.
conclusionThe GPs had initially little awareness of this safety risk, but there were differences in practice style and attitudes towards DS. The GPs did not perceive themselves as main responsible for safe use of DS in patient with dementia. The most important reason to disclaim responsibility was lack of information about the products. One suggestion for improvement was better integration of DS in patients' medical record.
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.