ArticleInternational journal of nursing studies advances2025
Enhancing ethical self-efficacy among dementia caregiver staff: A mixed-methods feasibility study of the care programme.
Article in International journal of nursing studies advances, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The global population living with dementia is rapidly increasing, with projections estimated at 78 million by 2030 and 132 million by 2050 due to ageing demographics. Despite the increasing prevalence of dementia, effective treatments remain limited. High-quality care is critical, but it presents complex ethical challenges, including balancing autonomy with best interests, addressing the needs of individuals with dementia and their caregivers, and equitably allocating resources. To address these challenges, we introduced the CARE programme, a systematic approach to ethics work, in nursing homes to enhance the ethical self-efficacy of nursing home staff. Objective: This study assessed the feasibility of the CARE programme in a community-based Danish nursing home setting. Using the framework of Bowen et al. and a mixed-methods research design, we conducted six face-to-face focus group interviews with nursing home staff, two telephone interviews with nursing home managers, and a survey among 90 participants. Data were collected in the spring and fall of 2022. Method: Quantitative data were analysed using STATA for descriptive statistics, while qualitative data were processed using a six-step template analysis framework. Results: The results indicate high feasibility and acceptance of the CARE programme among the nursing home staff. To a high/some degree, 97 % expressed satisfaction, 95 % found the programme relevant to their work, 90 % believed it would improve dementia care, and 82 % felt better equipped to handle ethical dilemmas. Both the management and staff acknowledged the programme's effectiveness in filling the critical gap in ethics training in nursing homes. Appreciation for external facilitation, participation from multiple nursing homes, and cross-institutional group work emphasised the value of the programme. Conclusion: The quantitative results indicate high levels of satisfaction and relevance, with the majority of participants believing that the program improves care and enhances their ability to manage ethical issues. Qualitative insights further emphasize the program's success in meeting the need for ethics training, facilitated by external researchers and cross-institutional collaboration. Full implementation of the CARE programme requires a cultural shift in nursing homes that advocates for universal staff involvement in ethics training and promotes open dialogue about ethical issues. Moreover, policy changes may be necessary to secure funding and establish minimum training standards for nursing home staff.
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.