Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39819971›Full record

ArticleImplementation science communications2025

Designing an intervention to improve cognitive evaluations in primary care.

Kyra S O'Brien, Kristin Harkins, MaryAnne Peifer, Melanie Kleid, Cameron Coykendall, Judy Shea, Jason Karlawish, Robert E Burke

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. 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

8 authors.

Kyra S O'BrienDepartment of Neurology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, 3400 Spruce Street, 3W Gates, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. kyra.o'brien@pennmedicine.upenn.edu.
Kristin HarkinsDepartment of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
MaryAnne PeiferDepartment of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Melanie KleidDepartment of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Cameron CoykendallDepartment of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Judy SheaDepartment of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Jason KarlawishDepartment of Neurology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, 3400 Spruce Street, 3W Gates, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Robert E BurkeLeonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Funding

Research Education ComponentP30AG072979 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI DAVID A WOLK · 2021 to 2026
$24.8M
AHRQ HHS P30 HS029745NIA NIH HHS P30 AG072979
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEarly diagnosis is crucial to the optimal management of patients with cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) or AD-related dementias. For some patients, early detection of cognitive impairment enables access to disease-modifying therapies. For all patients, it allows access to psychosocial supports. Patients typically first present their concerns about their cognition to a primary care provider, but in this setting, cognitive impairment is commonly underdiagnosed. There is also high variability in how cognitive evaluations are performed. We sought to understand barriers to and facilitators of cognitive evaluations in primary care, map barriers to implementation strategies, and gain consensus from stakeholders on possible strategies to improve dementia diagnosis in primary care.

methodsSemi-structured interviews conducted with primary care providers (PCPs). We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to inform our question guide and analysis, and incorporated chart-stimulated recall - using actual patients who had cognitive complaints who had presented to these providers - to understand clinicians' medical decision-making processes. These data were used to map identified barriers and facilitators to targeted implementation strategies. Then, this candidate list of strategies was presented to an expert stakeholder panel including clinicians and clinical operations specialists. Through a modified Delphi process, the list was narrowed to select the most promising strategies to incorporate in an intervention to improve cognitive evaluations in primary care.

resultsTwenty PCPs were interviewed and mentioned barriers included lack of expertise to perform or interpret an assessment, time pressures, lack of incentives, competing priorities, lack of decision-making supports, and limited access to dementia specialists. Facilitators included the presence of an informant or caregiver and having additional staff to conduct cognitive testing. Implementation mapping resulted in a list of 15 candidate strategies. Using the modified Delphi process, these were narrowed to six.

conclusionsWe used a rigorous process to identify barriers to and facilitators of cognitive assessments in primary care, identify promising implementation strategies to address these barriers, and obtain the feedback of front-line users on these strategies. This holds substantial promise for improving cognitive assessments in primary care in future implementation trials.

Indexed as

Cognitive impairmentConsolidated framework for implementation researchModified Delphi methodPrimary care

Identifiers

PMID39819971
PMCPMC11740457

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.