ArticlePloS one2025
Methodological considerations for assessing elder mistreatment of older adults with cognitive impairment: A scoping review protocol.
Article in PloS one, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Elder mistreatment (EM) of older persons with cognitive impairment is thought to be grossly underestimated in part due to communication barriers experienced by victims and a lack of consistent screening and reporting, which can skew current understandings of this problem. To improve EM risk and prevalence screening in relation to cognitive impairment, it is important to understand specific approaches for implementing assessment tools and interventions for members of this population. Accordingly, this scoping review (OSF registration osf.io/759k3) will identify, summarize, and compare methodological considerations adopted in studies assessing EM risk and occurrence among older persons with varying degrees of cognitive impairment. Through mapping out existing strategies and approaches used to develop, test, and implement EM screening tools or interventions, this review will outline previously identified recommendations and challenges pertinent to future EM assessment, reduction, and prevention efforts. We will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines and apply the Arksey and O'Malley (2005) scoping review framework. We will identify relevant studies by comprehensively searching electronic databases, including Ovid (Medline), Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Cochrane Trials (CENTRAL), and Elsevier's Scopus. Reference lists of included studies will also be examined. For article selection, we will use Covidence software to guide a two-step process of title/abstract and full article screening, which will allow us to identify eligible studies based on our inclusion and exclusion criteria that follows the Study Design, Data, Methods, Outcomes (SDMO) framework. A standardized data extraction tool will be used to collect information related to authors, year of publication, research objectives, sample and study design characteristics, measures, analysis, outcomes, limitations, and study conclusions and implications related to cognition. Data will be analyzed using a thematic approach and presented through the reporting of descriptive statistics and summaries.
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.