ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2025
Enhancing quality of life measurement: adapting the ASCOT easy read for older adults accessing social care.
Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Co-Designing an Easy-Read Adult Social Care Outcomes Measure for Older People: Approach to and Reflections on Involving People Living With Dementia and Their Supporters.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- The adult social care outcomes toolkit easy read for older people (ASCOT-ER OP): an exploratory factor analysis and Rasch validation study.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Use of the adult social care outcomes toolkit (ASCOT) in research studies: an international scoping review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to adapt and assess the content validity of the ASCOT Easy Read (ASCOT-ER) for older people accessing social care.
methodsA co-production working group of 8 older social care users and their supporters was established to evaluate the comprehensibility and relevance of the ASCOT-ER images, wording and layout. Changes made by the working group were iteratively tested using cognitive interviewing techniques (think aloud) with 25 older social care users not able to self-complete the original ASCOT.
resultsCo-research with people with dementia and their supporters was critical to the development of an effective and accessible tool. Issues identified with comprehension, recall, judgement and response were addressed through iterative adjustments to design, layout and wording. An unexpected finding was that illustrations were disliked or disregarded by the majority of people, and, in particular, those living with dementia. This result contrasts with the typical assumption of easy read approaches, where illustrations are expected to enhance comprehension.
conclusionThe ASCOT-ER measure for older people is suitable for older people using social care services with mild to moderate dementia, mild cognitive impairment and other age-related needs. The revisions applied were designed to improve comprehension, judgement and response for this group and even those who were most cognitively impaired experienced fewer issues by the final round of testing. Nonetheless, some prompting was still required, particularly for those with higher levels of cognitive impairment and it is likely that some respondents will require the questionnaire to be administered in an interview format.
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.