ArticleBMC geriatrics2024
Empowering informal caregivers and nurses to take a person-centred view: adaptation and clinical utility of the Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale (IPOS-Dem) for use in acute and community care settings.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparing EQ-5D-5L and IPOS among residents with malignant tumors in a community home hospice: a longitudinal study.BMC palliative care · 2025Article
- Internal consistency and structural validity of the Swiss easy-read Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale for People with dementia: a secondary exploratory factor analysis.BMC palliative 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDementia is a progressive and terminal illness. Symptoms are present for people with dementia across all stages, leading to poor quality of life and considerable carer burden. In acute and community care services, no holistic, person-centred outcome tools are available for nurses and informal caregivers to measure symptoms and needs from the person`s with dementia point of view. We therefore undertook validation (exploring semantic/conceptual equivalence, content validity, and views on clinical utility) for a measure (IPOS-Dem) in the community and acute care setting in Switzerland.
methodsThis was a rigorous, multi-step, cross-sectional, multi-method study conducted with nurses and relatives caring for people with dementia in the community and acute care setting. Multiple components were aligned: 1) forward and backward translation from German to Swiss German to achieve semantic equivalence; 2) focus groups to explore clinical utility and conceptual equivalence; 3) cognitive debriefing to review content validity. An expert review was included at the end of each phase.
resultsSix people from the public and 24 nurses/relatives were included. Semantic equivalence was achieved after making 14 changes to the wording of items. Participants judged the IPOS-Dem (CH) as a clinically useful intervention in the domains of appropriateness, accessibility, practicability, and acceptability for the following reasons: (1) it enables support for informal caregivers, (2) it provides an overview of the priorities of care, thus supporting symptom review, (3) it allows nurses with different qualifications to contribute critical observations, thus fostering communication and teamwork, and (4) it increases an awareness of change in symptoms throughout the disease trajectory. In the cognitive debriefing interviews, setting and respondent-dependent differences in the conceptual understanding of item descriptors were observed for 11 of 31 items.
conclusionIn this novel work, we demonstrate the newly-translated and culturally-adapted IPOS-Dem (CH) is a relevant and comprehensive measure for persons with mild to severe dementia. It can aid a generalist workforce across settings to assess palliative care-relevant symptoms and concerns.
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.