ArticleBMC health services research2024
Exploring challenges and innovation in memory assessment services in England and Wales - a national survey and case study approach.
Article in BMC health services research, 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.
- Future directions for brain health clinics.BJPsych open · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo explore the design, delivery models and identify good and innovative practices in Memory Assessment Services (MAS) in England and Wales.
methodsA two-stage service evaluation comprising (1) on-line survey of MAS providers to identify features of the commissioning models, service design, delivery, and challenges alongside examples of good/innovative practice; (2) qualitative case studies using video/telephone interviews with key staff and people who had used the service.
resultsThe 49 respondents to the survey reported a shift in delivery of MAS post COVID and identified key areas for improvement, including a need for specialist staff, support for MCI and rarer dementias, and capacity for post diagnostic support. The 15 case studies illustrated good practice and innovation focusing on post diagnostic support, equity of access, working with external services/service location, MCI and rarer dementia and involving specialist staff.
conclusionsThe evaluation speaks to the importance of (re)evaluation of services to identify local need and the importance of commissioning based on local need and innovative approaches that my sit outside of 'typical' MAS pathways.
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.